the influence of video analysis on teaching

Brigham Young University Brigham Young University

BYU ScholarsArchive BYU ScholarsArchive

Theses and Dissertations

2010-07-12

The Influence of Video Analysis on Teaching The Influence of Video Analysis on Teaching

Tonya R. Tripp Brigham Young University - Provo

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd

Part of the Educational Psychology Commons

BYU ScholarsArchive Citation BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Tripp, Tonya R., "The Influence of Video Analysis on Teaching" (2010). Theses and Dissertations. 2562. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/2562

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected].

http://home.byu.edu/home/

http://home.byu.edu/home/

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd?utm_source=scholarsarchive.byu.edu%2Fetd%2F2562&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/798?utm_source=scholarsarchive.byu.edu%2Fetd%2F2562&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/2562?utm_source=scholarsarchive.byu.edu%2Fetd%2F2562&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected],%[email protected]

The Influence of Video Analysis on Teaching

Tonya R. Tripp

A dissertation submitted to the faculty of

Brigham Young University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Peter J. Rich, Chair

Charles Graham

David Williams

Nancy Wentworth

Geoff Wright

Department of Instructional Psychology & Technology


August 2010

Copyright © 2010 Tonya R. Tripp

All Rights Reserved

ABSTRACT

The Influence of Video Analysis on Teaching

Tonya R. Tripp

Department of Psychology

Doctor of Philosophy

As video has become more accessible, there has been an increase in the use of video for

teacher reflection. Although past studies have investigated the use of video for teacher

reflection, there is not a review of practices and processes for effective use of video analysis.

The first article in this dissertation reviews 52 studies where teachers used video to reflect on

their teaching. Most studies included in the review reported that video was a beneficial feedback

method for teachers. However, few studies discussed how video encourages teachers to change

their practices.

The second article in this dissertations investigates the how video influences the teacher

change process. The study found that teachers did change their practices as a result of using

video analysis. Teachers reported that video analysis encouraged them to change because they

were able to: (a) focus their analysis, (b) see their teaching from a new perspective, (c) feel

accountable to change their practice, (d) remember to implement changes, and (e) see their

progress.

Keywords: video, video analysis tools, teacher reflection

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my committee chair, Peter Rich for his feedback, support, and the

many moments of laughter. You were so much fun to work with. I also appreciate the feedback

I received from my committee members, Charles Graham, David Williams, Geoff Wright, and

Nancy Wentworth. I‘m thankful for the teachers who allowed me to observe them as they used a

video analysis tool to reflect on their teaching. Most of all, I am grateful for my family‘s

encouragement.

iv

Table of Contents

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x

List of Figures for Article 2 ........................................................................................................... xi

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Article 1: Using Video to Analyze Teaching .................................................................................. 2

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 3

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4

Dimensions of Video Analysis ....................................................................................................... 5

Reflection Tasks .......................................................................................................................... 5

Code/checklist ......................................................................................................................... 5

Interviews/conferences ............................................................................................................ 7

Written reflections ................................................................................................................... 8

Video editing ........................................................................................................................... 9

Reflection Facilitation ............................................................................................................... 10

Individual/Collaborative Reflection .......................................................................................... 11

Individual reflection .............................................................................................................. 11

Collaborative reflection ......................................................................................................... 11

Both individual and collaborative reflection ......................................................................... 12

Video Length ............................................................................................................................. 12

Number of Reflections .............................................................................................................. 13

Measuring Reflection ................................................................................................................ 14

Reflection comments ............................................................................................................. 14

v

Changes in teaching practices ................................................................................................ 14

Self-assessment of reflection ability ...................................................................................... 15

Perceptions of effectiveness .................................................................................................. 15

Pre- and post-test scores ........................................................................................................ 16

Accuracy of coding ................................................................................................................ 16

Conclusions and Future Research ................................................................................................. 17

Reflection Tasks ........................................................................................................................ 17

Reflection Facilitation ............................................................................................................... 18

Individual/Collaborative Reflection .......................................................................................... 18

Length of Videos and Number of Reflections .......................................................................... 18

Measuring Reflection ................................................................................................................ 19

References ..................................................................................................................................... 20

Appendix: Synthesis of Video Analysis Studies .......................................................................... 28

Article 2: The Influence of Video Analysis on the Process of Teacher Change .......................... 52

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 53

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 54

Video Analysis Review................................................................................................................. 54

Improved Ability to Evaluate Teaching .................................................................................... 55

Changes Made to Teaching ....................................................................................................... 57

Unaddressed Issues and Future Research.................................................................................. 57

Method .......................................................................................................................................... 58

Procedures ................................................................................................................................. 58

Set up ..................................................................................................................................... 58

vi

Record teaching ..................................................................................................................... 60

Analyze teaching ................................................................................................................... 60

Discuss analysis ..................................................................................................................... 60

Participants ................................................................................................................................ 61

Special education teachers ..................................................................................................... 61

Religious education teachers ................................................................................................. 61

English Language Learner (ELL) teachers ............................................................................ 62

Data Collection .......................................................................................................................... 62

Observations .......................................................................................................................... 62

Interviews .............................................................................................................................. 62

Artifacts ................................................................................................................................. 63

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 63

Findings......................................................................................................................................... 63

Recognize the Need to Change ................................................................................................. 64

Gain new perspective ............................................................................................................. 68

Focus the analysis. ................................................................................................................. 69

See with own eyes. ................................................................................................................ 71

Brainstorm Ideas for Change..................................................................................................... 72

Identify specific changes. ...................................................................................................... 72

Gain new perspective ............................................................................................................. 74

Focused discussion ................................................................................................................ 74

Express empathy .................................................................................................................... 75

Implement Ideas ........................................................................................................................ 75

vii

Ownership .............................................................................................................................. 76

Accountability ....................................................................................................................... 77

Vivid images .......................................................................................................................... 77

Repetition............................................................................................................................... 78

Evaluate Changes ...................................................................................................................... 79

Proof ...................................................................................................................................... 80

Formative evaluation ............................................................................................................. 81

Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 82

Positive Effects of Video Analysis............................................................................................ 82

Ability to focus on key aspects. ............................................................................................. 82

Gain a new perspective. ......................................................................................................... 84

Increased trust in feedback. ................................................................................................... 84

Motivated to improve. ........................................................................................................... 85

Improved memory of desired changes................................................................................... 86

Ability to see progression. ..................................................................................................... 86

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 87

References ..................................................................................................................................... 89

Final Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 93

Article 1 ..................................................................................................................................... 93

Reflection tasks...................................................................................................................... 93

Reflection facilitation ............................................................................................................ 94

Individual/collaborative reflection ........................................................................................ 94

Length of videos and number of reflections .......................................................................... 94

viii

Measuring reflection .............................................................................................................. 94

Article 2 ..................................................................................................................................... 95

Appendix: Methods ....................................................................................................................... 98

Method Rationale ...................................................................................................................... 98

Procedures ................................................................................................................................. 99

Set up. .................................................................................................................................... 99

Record teaching. .................................................................................................................. 100

Analyze teaching. ................................................................................................................ 100

Discussion. ........................................................................................................................... 101

Context and Participants.......................................................................................................... 101

Elementary public school teacher. ....................................................................................... 101

College instructors. .............................................................................................................. 102

Religious education teachers. .............................................................................................. 102

Discussion group participants. ............................................................................................. 103

Data Collection Procedures ..................................................................................................... 103

Observations. ....................................................................................................................... 103

Interviews. ........................................................................................................................... 103

Artifacts. .............................................................................................................................. 103

Data Analysis Procedures........................................................................................................ 104

Data Reporting ........................................................................................................................ 104

Standards Followed ................................................................................................................. 105

Credibility. ........................................................................................................................... 105

Dependability....................................................................................................................... 105

ix

Confirmability. .................................................................................................................... 106

Transferability. .................................................................................................................... 106

Ethical treatment. ................................................................................................................. 106

Assumptions ............................................................................................................................ 106

Transferability. .................................................................................................................... 106

Technical difficulties. .......................................................................................................... 107

Ability to attend to multiple things ...................................................................................... 107

Ability to remember the teaching event. ............................................................................. 107

Opportunity to discuss reflections. ...................................................................................... 107

References for Combined Sections ............................................................................................. 108

x

List of Tables

Article 1

Table 1: Dimensions of Video Analysis .............................................................................. 6

Article 2

Table 1: Reported Benefits of Video Throughout the Change Process ................................ 65

Table 2: Recognize the Need to Change ............................................................................... 68

Table 3: Brainstorm Ideas for Change .................................................................................. 73

Table 4: Implement Ideas in Future Teaching ...................................................................... 76

Table 5: Evaluate Changes.................................................................................................... 79

xi

List of Figures for Article 2

Figure 1: Procedures used during the study ................................................................................. 59

Figure 2: Screenshot of a Teacher‘s Self-Analysis in MediaNotes ............................................. 59

Figure 3: Taxonomic Analysis of the Change Process ................................................................ 64

Video Analysis 1

Introduction

Reflection has become an integral part of most teacher training programs. Researchers

and educators have reported that video reflection can be an effective feedback strategy for

helping instructors improve their teaching (Penny & Coe, 2004). As video has become more

accessible, there has been increased interest in using video for teacher development. However,

there has not been a synthesis of practices and processes for effective video analysis nor has

there been an emphasis on the effect of video analysis on teacher change. Therefore, the purpose

of this dissertation is to review the video analysis process used in past studies and to investigate

how video analysis affects teacher change.

This dissertation consists of two articles. The first article is a review of the video

reflection practices used in 52 studies. The review discusses the dimensions of the video

analysis process that varied across past studies: (a) type of tasks, (b) manner of facilitation, (c)

extent to which teachers reflect individually or collaboratively, (d) length of video used, (e)

number of reflections, and (f) measurement. After reviewing past studies, the researcher

discovered that studies typically reported that video was beneficial for teacher reflection, but few

studies investigated how video analysis influenced teacher change. Schön stated that reflection

should lead individuals to action (1983). Therefore, if video is beneficial for teacher reflection, it

should lead teachers to action, or to change. Since very little is known about how video

influences teacher change, the second article examined the impact of video analysis on the

teacher change process. By reviewing past studies and understanding how educators engage in

the change process, the researcher hopes that educators will be able to utilize video more

effectively to instigate teacher change.

Video Analysis 2

Article 1: Using Video to Analyze Teaching

Running Head: VIDEO ANALYSIS

Literature Review: Using Video to Analyze Teaching

Tonya R. Tripp


Video Analysis 3

Abstract

Recently, interest in using video to facilitate teacher reflection has increased. However, there is

not a framework that is based on the results of video analysis research available to those who are

interested in designing their own video analysis studies. The purpose of this paper is to review

past studies in order to help educators make more informed decisions as they establish their own

video analysis processes. This review includes 52 studies where participants recorded their own

teaching, examined their performance on video, and reflected on the performance. Several

dimensions of video analysis that varied across past studies are discussed: type of tasks, manner

of facilitation, extent to which teachers reflect individually or collaboratively, length of video

used, number of reflections, and measurement. This paper summarizes reported findings

regarding each of these dimensions and raises several questions that need further investigation.

Video Analysis 4

Introduction

Interest in video for teacher reflection has waxed and waned since its inception. As video

has become more accessible, there has been renewed interest in using video for teacher

development. Past studies reported that video reflection can be an effective feedback strategy for

helping instructors improve their teaching (Penny & Coe, 2004). Although studies reported that

video was beneficial for teacher reflection, the processes used to come to this conclusion varied

widely across studies. For example, in some studies teachers reflected on their videos

individually, while in other studies teachers reflected on their videos collaboratively. Studies

also used varying video reflection tasks, guiding frameworks, and methods for measuring the

benefits of video reflection. Understanding the varying dimensions of past studies can help those

who are interested in using video analysis make more informed decisions about the process for

conducting their own video reflections.

This paper reviews video reflection practices that have been used in teacher education.

The review was narrowed to studies where participants recorded their own teaching, examined

their performance on video, and reflected on the performance. This includes studies that were

conducted with both preservice and inservice teachers. Because we were interested in

determining how examining one‘s own teaching performance on video influences self-reflection,

this review does not include studies where teachers examined the performances of other teachers

on video. Additionally, since we were interested in how teachers use video to alter their actual

teaching experiences, we do not include microteaching in this paper.

We searched ERIC, SSCI, PsycInfo, Academic Search Premier, and digital dissertation

databases for articles about video and self reflection, using the following terms: video, self-

reflection, reflection, evaluation, teachers, and video analysis tools. We located additional studies

Video Analysis 5

by identifying references from the resulting set of articles. Additionally, we identified a few key

articles (e.g., Fuller & Manning, 1973) and performed a highly-cited search using the ISI citation

index to discover newer articles that may have been based on early video analysis work. Finally,

we contacted researchers at several universities that are currently using video analysis tools to

report their current research. This resulted in a final set of 52 studies, including journal articles,

conference presentations, and dissertations.

This paper reviews dimensions that varied across the 52 studies. The paper is organized

around six questions educators may want to consider when establishing a video reflection

process. The intent of this paper is to help teacher educators make more informed decisions as

they begin conducting their own video analysis studies.

Dimensions of Video Analysis

Dimensions of the video analysis process that varied across past research studies include:

(a) reflection tasks, (b) reflection facilitation, (c) individual and collaborative reflection, (d)

video length, (e) number of reflections, and (f) measuring reflection (see Table 1).

Reflection Tasks

In past studies, teachers engaged in several reflection tasks during or after viewing their

teaching videos. These tasks included completing codes or checklists, participating in interviews

or conferences, writing reflections, and video editing. This section explains how these tasks

were used in the studies and summarizes the effectiveness of the tasks for facilitating reflection.

Code/checklist. In several studies, teachers used codes or checklists to help facilitate

their video reflections. Teachers typically tallied the number of times certain behaviors

Video Analysis 6

Table 1

Dimensions of Video Analysis

Dimension Definition Question

Reflection Tasks Tasks teachers participated in during or

after viewing their teaching: (a)

completing codes or checklists, (b)

participating in interviews or

conferences, (c) writing reflections, and

(d) video editing.

What type of reflection

tasks will I ask teachers

to engage in during their

video reflections?

Reflection Facilitation

How the reflection process was

facilitated. For example, in some

studies participants chose their own

reflection focus, while in other studies

researchers or supervisors guided the

teachers‘ reflections.

Will I provide teachers

with a framework to

guide their reflections?

Individual Reflection

Collaborative Reflection

Individual reflection refers to instances

where teachers viewed and reflect on

their video individually.

Collaborative reflections describe when

participants reflected on their videos

with supervisors, researchers, peers,

and/or colleagues

Will I ask teachers to

reflect individually,

collaboratively, or both?

Video Length

In past studies the length of video used

for reflection varied from three minutes

to an entire teaching episode.

What length of video

will teachers use for

reflection?

Number of Reflections

In past studies the number of times

teachers reflected on their videos varied

from one to more than three reflections.

How many times will

teachers reflect on their

videos?

Measuring Reflection

This refers to how studies determined

the influence of video on teachers‘

reflections.

What methods will I use

to determine if video

was beneficial for

teacher reflection?

Video Analysis 7

occurred. For example, in Brawdy & Byra (1994) teachers tallied the number of positive and

negative feedback statements and questions they used during their lesson. Studies reported that

using checklists to reflect on teaching videos helped teachers to notice specific behaviors and to

gain insights into their teaching (Hougham, 1992; Prusak, Dye, Graham, & Gaser, 2010; Schmidt

& McCutcheon, 1994; and Struyk & McCoy, 1993). Although researchers found codes and

checklists to be beneficial for facilitating reflection, one of the challenges researchers

encountered was determining the optimal number of categories or items that should be included

on the checklists or coding sheets (Prusak et al., 2010). Therefore, teacher educators who choose

to use codes or checklists to facilitate teachers‘ analyses may need to investigate the optimal

number of codes or items teachers should focus on during their video reflections.

Interviews/conferences. Interviews or conferences are another reflection task educators

might consider as they establish a video analysis process. In past studies teachers were asked to

discuss their teaching videos during an interview with researchers or supervisors or in a

discussion group. The reported value of using video conferences to facilitate video reflections is

discussed below.

In 17 studies, teachers discussed their video in an interview or conference session with

supervisors or researchers. Teachers reported that optimal learning occurred when they watched

and discussed their teaching with their supervisor (Grainger, 2004; Miyata, 2002). Teachers felt

that video-based feedback was more helpful than supervisor evaluations without video feedback

because video served as a common frame of reference on which the discussions were based

(Deasey, Heitzenroder, Wienkee & Bloom (as cited in Wang & Hartley, 2003). As a result,

many teachers felt that the suggestions and recommendations made during the video conferences

Video Analysis 8

were the most influential contribution to teacher change (Brawdy & Byra, 1994; Dawson,

Dawson, & Forness, 2001; Rich & Hannafin, 2008b).

In 10 studies, teachers met with their colleagues or peers to view and reflect on their

videos. Teachers in these studies also felt that viewing and discussing their videos was the most

valuable component of their professional development (Borko, Jacobs, Eiteljorg & Pittman,

2008; Griswold, 2004). Video discussions helped teachers see their teaching from a new

perspective, recognize aspects of their teaching that they had not previously noticed, and realize

that others had similar struggles (Bryan & Recesso, 2006; Collins, Cook-Cottone, Robinson &

Sullivan, 2004; Griswold, 2004; Miller, 2009; Pailliotet, 1995; Schmidt &McCutcheon, 1994).

Overall, past studies indicated that teachers not only valued discussing their teaching

videos with others, but felt that it was one of the most important aspects of their development.

Video conferences provided a common frame of reference on which the discussions were based

and allowed teachers to gain new insights into their teaching. Although past studies indicated

that video conferences were beneficial they did not specify how many conferences or interviews

are necessary for optimal growth, how frequently the conferences should be conducted, or at

what point in the teachers‘ program or career the conferences or interview sessions should be

implemented. Consequently, if teacher educators decide to use interviews or conferences,

additional research may be needed to effectively arrange the logistics of video conferences.

Written reflections. Many studies asked teachers to complete written reflections during

or after viewing their teaching videos. Teachers‘ written reflections included notes, essays,

questionnaire responses, and journal writings. These studies allowed teachers to perceive

classroom interactions at a slower pace and recognize things they did not notice when they

reflected from memory (Miller & Carney, 2008; Rich & Hannafin, 2008; Rosaen, Lundeberg,

Video Analysis 9

Cooper, Fritzen, & Terpstra, 2008; Tripp, 2009; Wright, 2008). As a result, researchers felt that

teachers‘ written reflections tended to be more focused and accurate than teacher reflections

without video (Shepherd & Hannafin, 2009; Welsch & Devlin, 2004). Teachers who used video

to write their reflections also improved their ability to use evidence to support their reflection

comments (Sherin & vanEs, 2005, 2009).

Although studies reported that written video reflections were useful for evaluating

teaching, some studies reported that teachers valued discussing their videos with others more

than writing their own reflections (Halter, 2006; Miyata, 2002; Welsch & Devlin, 2004). This

was especially prominent in preservice teachers who trusted the feedback of others more than

their own feelings (Rich & Hannafin, 2008b). It is possible that teachers would value written

video reflections more if the reflections were used in conjunction with video conferences.

Therefore, those who decide to use written reflections may want to consider having teachers

discuss their written reflections with others.

Video editing. Another reflection task teacher educators may want to consider when

establishing a video analysis process is video editing. In past studies teachers edited their videos

to create a case study of their teaching, or they selected video clips to serve as evidence to

support their reflections. Studies reported mixed results about using video editing to reflect on

teaching. Some studies reported that there was not a significant difference in the reflection of

teachers who used video editing to support their written reflections and teachers who wrote

reflections without video editing (Spurgeon & Bowen, 2002; Warden, 2004). Cunningham &

Benedetto (2002) also reported that teachers often spent more time selecting clips than actually

reflecting. In contrast, other studies found that teachers‘ reflections were more detailed, longer,

and multifaceted when they participated in video editing compared to written reflections.

Video Analysis 10

Teachers also preferred the video case construction process to written reflections (Nicol &

Crespo, 2004; Rosaen, Lundeberg, Terpstra, Cooper, Fu, Nui, in press; Yerrick, Ross, &

Molebash, 2005).

It is possible that additional factors, such as reflection training, numbers of opportunities

teachers have to edit their videos, or length of time between the lesson and the editing process,

may impact the value of using video editing to reflect. Those interested in using video editing to

facilitate teachers‘ reflections may need to further investigate the most effective method for

incorporating video editing into the reflection process.

Along with video editing, educators need consider which tasks or combination of tasks

they will ask teachers to complete during their video reflections. Past studies asked teachers to

complete codes or checklists, participate in interviews or conferences, write reflections, and edit

their videos. Most studies reported that these tasks were useful for facilitating reflection, but

teachers seemed to value video discussions more than the other reflection tasks. As educators

select tasks for video reflection they should also be aware that there are several questions that

need further investigation: What is the ideal number of codes or items for teachers to focus on

during their video analyses? How should the logistics of video conferences be carried out? Do

teachers value written reflections more when they are combined with other reflection tasks?

What is the best way to use video editing to facilitate reflection? Additionally, educators may

want to consider which combination of these tasks is most useful for facilitating reflections.


As educators set up a video analysis process they will also need to decide whether they

will provide teachers with a framework to guide their reflections. Past studies used reflection

questions, rubrics, checklists, or category codes to serve as a framework to guide teachers‘

Video Analysis 11

reflections. Most studies concluded that teachers needed a systematic set of procedures to guide

their reflections (Collins et al., 2004; Miyata, 2002). Researchers felt that providing teachers

with reflection guidance enhanced the quality of their reflections (Fox, Brantely-Dias, &

Calandra, 2007) and that without reflection guidance teachers tended to focus on the technical

aspects of their teaching (Calandra, Gurvitch, & Lund, 2008). Although these studies indicated

that teachers should be given a framework to guide their reflections, a few studies reported that

teachers preferred to select their own reflection focus (Nicol & Crespo, 2004; Rich & Hannafin,

2008b). Consequently, teacher educators might consider allowing teachers to select the focus of

their reflection, and then helping teachers to narrow their focus to a structured framework for the

reflection process.

Individual/Collaborative Reflection

Teacher educators may want to consider with whom teachers will reflect on their

teaching videos. Past studies asked teachers to reflect on their videos individually,

collaboratively, or individually and then collaboratively.

Individual reflection. Participants in several studies individually reflected on their

teaching by writing reflective essays, coding their video, or clipping segments and attaching

reflection comments. While most of the studies did not indicate whether the participants or

researchers felt that reflecting individually was beneficial, the participants in Halter (2006)

preferred feedback from their mentors or supervisors to reflecting on their own. They perceived

that their supervisors were more qualified to give feedback, and they trusted their supervisors‘

opinions more than their own.

Collaborative reflection. Several studies asked participants to reflect collaboratively

with supervisors, researchers, colleagues, and peers. These studies also indicated that it was

Video Analysis 12

beneficial for teachers to be able to discuss their teaching videos with others. Teachers felt that

viewing and discussing their videos resulted in optimal learning (Thomson, 1992). Group

discussions helped teachers to clarify, examine, and challenge their teaching assumptions and

practices (Grainger, 2004; Miller, 2009). Teachers also reported that the suggestions and

recommendations made by others were the most influential element in helping them change

(Rich & Hannafin, 2008b).

Both individual and collaborative reflection. Some studies included both collaborative

and individual reflections. Brawdy & Byra (1994) reported that teachers who met with a

supervisor to discuss their individual reflections had a higher rate of improvement than teachers

who reflected alone. Other studies found that allowing teachers to analyze their video before

meeting with others helped teachers to think about their reasoning for selecting certain clips and

to be more prepared for the discussions (Bryan & Recesso, 2006; Tripp, 2009).

Overall, studies reported that it was beneficial for teachers to discuss their reflection with

others, and some preservice teachers indicated that they preferred to reflect with their supervisors

because they valued their supervisors‘ thoughts about their teaching more than their own. The

studies did not investigate whether it was more beneficial to use both individual and

collaborative reflection, but a couple of studies indicated that teachers were more prepared for

their discussions when they spent time individually reviewing their teaching before their

discussions.

Video Length

In past studies, the length of the videos used for reflection varied from three-minute clips

of a lesson to an entire teaching episode. It is difficult to determine if the length of the video had

a significant impact on reflection since none of the studies compared the differences in the length

Video Analysis 13

of the video. However, the majority of the participants in Sharpe et al. (2003) thought the length

of the video used for reflection should be longer than three minutes, while Pailliotet (1995) stated

that the process of viewing an entire video was time consuming and claimed that it was

impossible to complete a deep viewing session with each student. Additional research is needed

to determine if there is an ideal length for teachers to reflect on.

Number of Reflections

The majority of studies asked teachers to view their videos one to three times. Studies

did not investigate whether the number of times teachers reflected influenced the value of their

video reflection, but half of the teachers in Sharpe et al. (2003) felt that viewing the same video

before and after the conference would have been valuable. The teacher in Storeygard & Fox

(1995) reported that she gained new insights every time she viewed her video, and the teacher in

Tripp (2009) wished she could reflect with video analysis every day, but recognized that it would

be logistically too difficult because she did not have enough time.

Teacher reflection research does not state how many times teachers need to reflect before

they begin to make changes to their practice. Therefore, additional research is needed to

determine if the number of times teachers reflect on their videos influences their reflection and

ultimately the changes they make to their practice. Future research might investigate how many

opportunities preservice teachers should be given to reflect during their programs, how many

opportunities inservice teachers should be given to reflect, how frequent the reflections should

be, the number of reflections that should be individual or collaborative, and whether the focus of

the reflection should change or remain the same with each reflection.

Video Analysis 14


As educators establish a video analysis process, they need to decide how they will

evaluate the effect of video on teachers‘ reflections. This is a valuable step to determine whether

the benefits of video reflection are worth both the financial and time commitment. To determine

effectiveness, past studies examined teachers‘ reflection comments, changes in teaching

practices, self assessments of reflection ability, perceptions of the effectiveness of using video to

facilitate reflection, scores on pre- and post-tests of teaching skills, and accuracy of video

coding. This section explains how studies measured reflection and summarizes the conclusions.

Reflection comments. Many studies examined teachers‘ written and verbal reflection

comments to determine the effect of video on reflection. These studies indicated that video

influenced what teachers noticed or focused on during their reflection (Byra, 1996; Sherin & van

Es, 2005, 2009). For example, teachers often shifted their reflection focus from themselves to

student thinking when they used video (Yerrick, Ross, & Molebash, 2005). Video also facilitated

detailed noticing and allowed teachers to analyze aspects of their teaching more specifically

(Rosaen et al., 2008; Tripp, 2009). Wright (2008) reported that the number of things teachers

noticed about their teaching increased when they used video to reflect rather than reflecting from

memory. Detailed analyses helped teachers to identify solutions to the problems they

encountered in their lessons, as well as broader applications for future teaching challenges

(Miller, 2009).

Changes in teaching practices. Some studies conducted classroom observations or

watched teachers‘ videos to determine if teachers made changes to their practice after

participating in video reflections. All the studies reported that teachers made changes or

improved their teaching practices after using video to reflect on their teaching (Koorland,

Video Analysis 15

Tuckman, Wallat, Long, Thompson, Silverman, 1985; Storeygard & Fox, 1995; Stadler, 2003;

Brawdy & Byra, 1994; Dawson, Dawson, & Forness, 2001; Hougham, 1992; Shepherd &

Hannafin, 2008, 2009; Wedman, Espinosa & Laffey, 1999). However, Hougham was the only

study that compared the changes that were made by teachers who used video to reflect with

changes made by teachers who reflected on their teaching without video. Hougham concluded

that teachers who used video to evaluate teaching improved their question asking strategies to a

greater degree than teachers who did not use video evaluations. Additionally, the studies did not

investigate whether the changes made by the teachers were temporary or lasting.

Self-assessment of reflection ability. Teachers in Warden (2004) assessed their ability to

reflect by completing a teacher profile at the beginning and end of the project. Twelve of the

thirteen teachers reported an improved perception of their reflective thinking skills and that the

process of video editing was helpful. However, there was not a significant difference in the

increase of perception of reflection ability among teachers who reflected with video and teachers

who reflected without video. Warden suggested that perceptions of reflection ability may be

influenced more by having opportunities to reflect than by using video for reflection.

Perceptions of effectiveness. In several studies teachers were asked to report whether

video reflections were valuable to their teaching. The majority of the participants in the studies

indicated that video reflections were beneficial. Thomson (1992) and Tripp (2009) were the only

studies that compared teachers‘ perceptions of the effectiveness of using video for personal

reflection with teachers‘ perceptions of the effectiveness of reflecting without video. Although

the majority of the responses to video reflections were positive, many teachers felt that neither

reflections with a supervisor nor individual reflections with video were as effective as

participating in both.

Video Analysis 16

Pre- and post-test scores. Some studies compared teachers‘ scores on pre- and post-tests

to determine how teachers‘ scores improved after participating in video reflections. Participants

in Halter (2006) and Kapanja (2001) took a test to determine their mastery of teaching skills.

Although Kapanja did not describe or report the results of the tests, Halter concluded that

reflection was a strong predictor of scores on the Performance Assessment for California

Teachers (PACT). Martin-Reynolds (1980) compared students‘ pre- and post-test responses to

the Video Self Report Form (VSRF). The researcher concluded that the teachers‘ responses

shifted from themselves to their students after participating in the video reflections.

Accuracy of coding. In another study, preservice teachers were given 15 codes to mark

and identify in their teaching videos (Prusak, Dye, Graham, and Gaser, 2010). Then researchers

compared the preservice teachers‘ codes with the codes of an experienced teacher to determine

the accuracy of the teachers‘ coding. Researchers found that the teachers were only moderately

able to code their videos like an expert. Nevertheless, Prusak et al. felt that the coding process

helped the teachers to gain valuable insights into their teaching.

In addition to coding videos, there are several methods educators may want to consider as

they investigate the benefits of video on teacher reflection: teachers‘ reflection comments,

changes in teaching practices, self-assessments of reflection ability, perceptions of the

effectiveness of video for reflection, and pre- and post- test scores. Past studies indicated that

when teachers used video to reflect, the focus of their comments shifted, and they made changes

in their teaching practices. Most teachers felt that it was beneficial to reflect on their teaching

using video, but teachers perceptions of their ability to reflect on their teaching was not

significantly different for teachers who reflected with or without video.

Video Analysis 17

Conclusions and Future Research

As interest in the use of video for teacher reflection increases, there are several questions

educators may want to consider as they develop their own video analysis processes (see Table 1).

Although some of these questions can be answered from the findings of past studies, there are

still questions that need further investigation. The following is a summary of the reported

findings for the varying dimensions of video analysis, as well as the aspects of video analysis

that need further investigation.

Reflection Tasks

There are a variety of reflection tasks that teachers can engage in during the video

analysis process. Past studies asked teachers to complete codes and checklists, participate in

interviews or conferences, write reflections, and edit their videos. The majority of studies

reported that these tasks were valuable for facilitating reflection. However, teachers preferred

conferences over other reflection tasks. Teachers felt like video discussions helped them see their

teaching from a new perspective. Video also provided a common frame of reference on which

the discussions were based. As a result, teachers felt like the suggestions and recommendations

made during the video conferences were the most important factor in the changes they made.

Although the reflection tasks appeared to be beneficial for helping teachers reflect on their

teaching, there are several aspects of these tasks that need further investigation: (a) ideal number

of items to include on coding sheets and checklists, (b) how the logistics of video conferences

should be carried out, (c) the most effective way to use video editing, and (d) whether combining

conferences with the other tasks increases the perceived value of those tasks.

Video Analysis 18


Past studies used reflective questions, rubrics, checklists, and category codes as

frameworks for the reflection process. Researchers reported that providing a framework

enhanced the quality of teachers‘ reflections. However, teachers reported that they wanted to

choose their own reflection focus. Therefore, researchers might consider allowing teachers to

select the focus of their reflection and then helping teachers to narrow the focus to a structured

framework.

Individual/Collaborative Reflection

Teachers overwhelmingly reported that they preferred discussing their reflections with

others to individually reflecting on their videos. This was especially prominent in preservice

teachers, who trusted others‘ opinions more than their own. A few of studies indicated that

asking teachers to discuss their video individually and then collectively improved the collective

discussions because teachers were more prepared. Additional research is needed to investigate

the benefits of using both individual and collaborative reflection as part of the video analysis

process. Future research might also investigate the number of conferences necessary for optimal

growth and how frequently the conferences should be held.

Length of Videos and Number of Reflections

Although the length of video teachers reflected on and the number of times teachers

reflected on their videos varied across studies, studies did not investigate how these

characteristics impacted teachers‘ reflections. Therefore, future research is needed to determine

if there is an optimal length of video teachers should use for reflection, as well as the number of

times teachers should reflect on their videos.

Video Analysis 19


Examining the benefits of video on teachers‘ reflections can help researchers determine

whether the benefits teachers receive from participating in video analysis are worth the

investment of time and money required to conduct the process. There are various ways that past

studies measured the effect of video on teacher reflection. Studies examined teachers‘ reflection

comments, changes in teaching practices, self-assessment of reflection ability, perceptions of

effectiveness, pre- and post-test scores, and coding accuracy. Researchers who are interested in

using video for reflection will need to determine which combination of these methods will help

them effectively answer their specific questions about the video analysis process.

Although video is used increasingly for teacher reflection, there has not been a

framework based on results of video analysis research available to those who are interested in

designing their own video analysis studies. This review synthesized several dimensions of the

video analysis process. Presented as practical considerations, these suggestions enable educators

to understand how their approach to video analysis might yield varying results. Careful

consideration of each of these dimensions does not guarantee that a successful process will be

developed. However, these can serve as a framework for those who are interested in using video

to facilitate teacher reflection.

Video Analysis 20

References

Athanases, S.Z. (1993). Adapting and tailoring lessons: Fostering teacher reflection to meet

varied student needs. Teacher Education Quarterly, 20(1), 71-81.

Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Eiteljorg, E., & Pittman, M. E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering

productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 24(2), 417-436.

Brantley-Dias, L., Dias, M., Frisch, J., & Rushton, G. (2008, April). The role of digital video and

critical incident analysis in learning to teach science. Paper presented at the American

Educational Research Association, New York, NY.

Brawdy, P. & Byra, M. (1994, April). A comparison of two supervisory models in a preservice

teaching practicum. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational

Research Association. New Orleans.

Bryan, L. A. & Recesso, A. (2006). Promoting reflection with a web-based video analysis tool.

Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(1), 31-39.

Byra, M. (1996). Post-Lesson conferencing strategies and preservice teachers' reflective

practices. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 16, 48-65.

Calandra, B., Brantley-Dias, L., & Dias, M. (2006). Using digital video for professional

development in urban schools: A preservice teachers experience with reflection. Journal

of Computing in Teacher Education, 22(4), 137-145.

Calandra, B., Brantley-Dias, L., Lee, J.K., & Fox, D.L. (2009). Using Video Editing to Cultivate

Novice Teachers‘ Practice. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(1), 73-

94.

Video Analysis 21

Calandra, B., Gurvitch, R., & Lund, J. (2008). An exploratory study of digital video editing as a

tool for teacher preparation. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16(2), 137-

153.

Collins, J. L., Cook-Cottone, C. P., Robinson, J. S., & Sullivan, R. R. (2004). Technology and

new directions in professional development: Applications of digital video, peer review,

and self-reflection. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(2), 131-146.

Cunningham, A. & Benedetto, S. (2002). Using Digital Video Tools to Promote Reflective

Practice. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology

and Teacher Education International Conference 2002 (pp. 551-553). Chesapeake, VA:

AACE. Retrieved September 2006, from

https://www.cu.edu/academicaffairs/assessment/what_people_doing/documents/UsingDi

gitalVideo.pdf

Cuper, P., Gong, Y., Farina, L. & Manning-Osborn, M. (2007). Video Analysis as a Reflective

Tool: Providing Pre-service Teachers a Gradual-Replay Lens on their Developing

Practice. In R. Carlsen et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology &

Teacher Education International Conference 2007 (pp. 45-48). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Dawson, P. J., Dawson, K. E., & Forness, S. R. (2001). Effect Of Video Feedback On Teacher

Behavior. Journal Of Educational Research, 68(5), 197-201.

Fox, D.L., Brantley-Dias, L., & Calandra, B. (2007, November). Promoting preservice teachers‘

reflective practice through digital video and critical incident analysis in secondary

English education. Paper presented at the 57th National Reading Conference, Austin, TX.

Fuller, F. F. & Manning, B. A. (1973). Self-confrontation reviewed: A conceptualization for

video playback in teacher education. Review of Educational Research 43(4), 469–528.

https://www.cu.edu/academicaffairs/assessment/what_people_doing/documents/UsingDigitalVideo.pdf

https://www.cu.edu/academicaffairs/assessment/what_people_doing/documents/UsingDigitalVideo.pdf

Video Analysis 22

Grainger, S. (2004). Practitioners as professionals: revealing the artistry of expert educators.

Paper presented at the 7th Australian VET Research Association Conference, Canberra.

Griswold, S. L. (2004). Videotaped performances: Guiding teacher professional development

within a competency-based framework. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(10).

(UMI No. 3150452)

Halter, C. P. (2006). The reflective lens: The effects of video analysis on preservice teacher

development. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(03). (UMI No. 3211280)

Hougham, P. (1992). Improving student teachers' strategies for asking a range of both high and

low level questions through video evaluations. Thesis, unpublished EdD Practicum

Papers.

Jensen, R. A., Shepston, T.J., Connor, K., & Killmer, N. (1994, February). Fear of the known:

Using audio-visual technology as a tool for reflection in teacher education. Paper

presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Teacher Education, Atlanta, GA.

Koorland, M. A., Tuckman, B. T., Wallat, C., Long, B., Thomson, S., & Silverman, M. (1985).

A pilot evaluation of the pre-ed program: An innovative student-teacher supervision

model, Educational Technology, October, 45-47.

Kapanja, E. (2001). A study of the effects of video tape recording in microteaching training.

British Journal of Educational Technology. 32(4), 483-486.

Krammer, K., Ratzka, N., Eckhard, K., Lipowsky, F., Pauli, C. & Reusser, K. (2006). Learning

with classroom videos: Conception and first results of an online teacher-training program.

ZDM, 38(5), 422-432.

Lokey-Vega, A. & Brantley-Dias, L. (2006). Another view on mentoring. Learning & Leading

with Technology, 34(2), 18-21.

Video Analysis 23

Martin-Reynolds, J. (1980). The Effects of a Self-Evaluation Model on the Focus Reaction of

Student-Teachers During Split-Screen Video-Tape feedback. Journal of Educational

Research, 73(6), 360-364.

Meade, P. & McMeniman, M. (1992). Stimulated recall: An effective methodology for

examining successful teaching in science. Australian Educational Researcher, 19(3)1-18.

Miller, M. J. (2009). Talking about our troubles: Using video-based dialogue to build preservice

teachers' professional knowledge. The Teacher Educator, 44(3), 143-163.

Miller, M. & Carney, J. (2008) Using Video Annotation Software to Enhance the Mentoring and

Professional Development of Teacher Candidates, Washington State Kappan: A journal

for research, leadership, and practice, 2(2) 16-17, 32.

Miyata, H. (2002). A study of developing reflective practices for preservice teachers through a

web-based electronic teaching portfolio and video-on demand assessment program.

Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education, Washington,

DC, 1039-1043.

Nicol, C. & Crespo, S. (2004). Learning to see in mathematics classrooms. Proceedings of the

28th

Conference of the international Group for the Psychology of Mathematics

Education. Norway, Bergen, 3, 417-424.

Pailliotet, A. W. (1995). I never saw that before: A deeper view of video analysis in teacher

education. Teacher Educator, 31(2) 138-156.

Penny, A. R. & Coe, R. (2004). Effectiveness of consultation on student ratings feedback: A

meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(2) 215-253.

Powell, E. (2005). Conceptualising and facilitating active learning: Teachers‘ video-stimulated

reflective dialogues. Reflective Practice, 6(3), 401-418.

Video Analysis 24

Preston, M. (2004). Evaluation: VITAL (video interactions for teaching and learning). New

York, NY: Columbia Center for New Media Teaching and Learning, Teacher's College,

Columbia University.

Preston, M.D., Campbell, G., Ginsburg, H., Sommer, P., & Moretti, F. (2005). Developing New

Tools for Video Analysis and Communication to Promote Critical Thinking. In P.

Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational

Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2005 (pp. 4357-4364). Chesapeake,

VA: AACE.

Prusak, K., Dye, B. R., Graham, C. R., & Graser, S. (2010, in press). Reliability of pre-service

physical education teachers' coding of teaching videos using Studiocode analysis

software. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education.

Rich, P. J. & Hannafin, M. J. (2008a). Decisions and reasons: Examining pre-service teacher

decision-making through video self-analysis. Journal of Computing in Higher Education,

20(1), 62-94.

Rich, P. J. & Hannafin, M. J. (2008b). Capturing and assessing evidence of student teacher

inquiry: A case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(6), 1426-1440.

Rich, P. & Hannafin, M. J. (2009). Scaffolded video self-analysis: Discrepancies between

preservice teachers' perceived and actual instructional decisions. Journal of Computing in

Higher Education.

Romano, M. & Schwartz, J. (2005). Exploring technology as a tool for eliciting and encouraging

teacher candidate reflection. Contemporary issues in Technology and Teacher Education,

5(2), 149-168.

Video Analysis 25

Rosaen, C. L., Lundeberg, M., Cooper, M., Fritzen, A., & Terpstra, M. (2008). Noticing

noticing: How does investigation of video records change how teachers reflect on their

experiences? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 347-360.

Saxena, A., & Stevens, R. (2007). Video traces: Creating common spaces between university and

public schools for preparing new teachers. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of

computer supported collaborative learning. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning.

Schmidt, C. P., & McCutcheon, J. W. (1994). Verbal versus nonverbal cues in evaluations of

teaching. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27(2), 118-225.

Schön, D. A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: how professionals think in action London:

Temple Smith.

Senger, E.S. (1998). Beyond classroom description: Methods of understanding reflection and

beliefs in mathematics teaching. Educational Research Quarterly, 21(3), 21-39.

Sharpe, L., Hu, C., Crawford, L., Gopinathan, S., Khine, M.S., Moo, S. N., & Wong, A. (2003).

Enhancing multipoint desktop video conferencing (MDVC) with lesson video clips:

Recent developments in pre-service teaching practice in Singapore. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 19, 529-541.

Shepherd, C. & Hannafin, M.J. (2008). Facilitating professional development through video

based, formative assessment e-portfolios. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education,

25(1), 63-69.

Shepherd, C. & Hannafin, M.J. (2009). Beyond recollection: Re-examining preservice teacher

practices using structured evidence, analysis, and reflection. Journal of Technology and

Teacher Education, 17(2), 229-251.

Video Analysis 26

Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2005). Using video to support teachers‘ ability to notice

classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475-491.

Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers'

professional vision. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 20-37.

Spurgeon, S., & Bowen, J. L. (2002). Digital video/multimedia portfolios as a tool to develop

reflective teacher candidates. Proceedings of the National Educational Computing

conference, San Antonio, TX.

Storeygard, J., & Fox, B. (1995). Reflections on video: One teacher‘s story. Journal of Staff

Development, 16(3), 25-29.

Stadler, H. (2003). Videos as a tool to foster the professional development of science teachers.

Proceedings from European Science Education Research Association 2003. Netherlands.

Retrieved September 2006 at

http://www1.phys.uu.nl/esera2003/programme/pdf%5C156S.pdf

Struyk, L. R. & McCoy, L. H. (1993). Pre-service Teachers‘ use of videotape for self-evaluation.

Clearing House, 67(1), 31-34.

Thomson, W. S. (1992). Using videotape as a supplement to traditional student teacher

supervision. Retrieved September 2006 from

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/26/2a/e4.p

df

Tripp, T. R. (2009). Understanding the use of video analysis tools to facilitate reflection among

pre-service teachers. Thesis, unpublished Master's thesis.

http://www1.phys.uu.nl/esera2003/programme/pdf%5C156S.pdf

Video Analysis 27

van Es, E. A. & Sherin, M. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers'

interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,

10(4), 571-596.

Viiri, J., & Saari, H. (2006). Teacher talk patterns in science lessons: Use in teacher education.

Journal of Science Teacher Education 17(4), 347-365.

Wang, J., & Hartley, K. (2003). Video technology as a support for teacher education reform.

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(1), 105-138.

Warden, B. J. (2004). Self-evaluation of reflective thinking among pre-service and in-

service teachers. Dissertation Abstracts International. (UMI No. 3152172)

Wedman, J.M., Espinosa, L.M., & Laffey, J. (1999). A process for understanding how a field

based course influences teachers‘ beliefs and practices. Teacher Educator, 34(3), 189-

214.

Welsch, R. G., & Devlin, P. A. (2004). Developing preservice teachers' reflection: Examining

the use of video. Action in Teacher Education, 12(4), 491-509.

Wright, G. A. (2008). How does video analysis impact teacher reflection-for-action. Unpublished

doctoral dissertation.

Yerrick, R., Ross, D., & Molebash, P. (2005). Too close for comfort: Real-Time science teaching

reflections via digital video editing. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16(4), 351-

375.

Video Analysis 28

Appendix: Synthesis of Video Analysis Studies

Video Analysis Studies Reviewed

Authors, Date Participants Video

Procedures Reflection Method Data Collection Results

Athanases,

S.Z. (1993)

24 teachers from

1 to 15 years of

experience

Recorded three

class groupings

(large-group,

small group,

and one-to-

one)

Selected two 3-5

minute episodes

from their lessons

demonstrating

successful events

and problems; met

with an examiner to

review clips; used

the clips in portfolio

Collected interviews and

written statements during

the nine months of the

study; conducted exit

interviews

Teachers reported growth in their

teaching and in their thinking

about their teaching.

Borko, H., et

al. (2008)

16 middle school

math teachers;

half attended

monthly

professional

development

workshop

Recorded at

least one

lesson; some

teachers shared

their video

with the group;

group

discussions

were recorded

and analyzed.

Coded their videos

and shared with

group

Coded teacher discourse

during group

discussions; established

categories from topics

consistently discussed

Teachers talked in a more

focused, in-depth, and analytical

manner about specific issues.

They focused more on content

and student thinking and the

teacher's role in probing

thinking.

Brantley-Dias,

et al. (2008)

8 preservice

science teachers

Recorded a

single lesson;

analyzed for 2-

3 critical

incidents

Used the Critical

Incident Reflection

protocol (Tripp,

1992) to guide

reflection

Analyzed edited video,

post-teaching interviews

The depth of reflection was

mostly technical.

Video Analysis 29

Authors, Date Participants

Video


Brawdy, P. &

Byra, M.

(1994)

PE teacher

majors

Recorded 10

minutes of

teaching

fundamental

motor skills

Group 1: analyzed

videos on their own

and set an objective.

Group 2: met with

the supervisor and

jointly coded types

and frequency of

verbal feedback,

and made a plan to

improve.

Tallied number of

positive and negative

feedback statements and

questions; compared

number of positive and

negative feedback

statements and questions

Teachers increased the frequency

of positive specific statements

and modified the frequency of

their positive general statements.

Bryan, L. A. &

Recesso, A.

(2006).

Science student

teachers

Recorded at

least once with

a max of three;

video streamed

across the local

school system

Identified instances

that supported or

contradicted their

personal teaching

statement; presented

clips to peers;

discussed outcomes

and reasoning;

identified a concrete

solution

Recorded weekly cohort

mtgs.; analyzed student

teachers' own written

VAT comments;

Analyzed student

teachers' video(s).

Better prepared to think through

and tackle demanding issues in

their teaching; more engaged in

thoughtful, structured dialog in

supervisory conferences; aware

of the complex nature of

teaching and learning

Byra, M.

(1996)

14 pre-service

PE teachers

Recorded a 30

minute lesson

Watched video;

answered questions

regarding feelings

about performance,

strengths of the

lesson, and aspects

for improvement

Researchers coded the

reflections as technical,

situational, and

sensitizing.

Video reflections focused on the

technical aspects of teaching.

Video Analysis Studies Reviewed (Continued)

Video Analysis 30


Video


Calandra, B.,

Brantley-Dias,

L., & Dias, M.

(2006)

1 preservice

teacher (Science

Education)

Recorded self

during 2

different

teaching cycles

Edited videos for

meaningful teaching

incidents; discussed

edited video with

cooperating teacher

Used Grounded Theory

to analyze data: audio-

taped teacher

conferences, full videos

of teaching episodes,

edited videos, debriefing

session (post-

conference), final

interview

Final video-stimulated interview

demonstrated high reflection on

the Sparks-Langer et al.

reflective scale. This contrasted

with low reflection when not

guided or video-enhanced.

Calandra, B.,

et al. (2009)

Group A used

guided and

collaborative

reflection

Group B created

video vignettes

Captured 1

episode of

teaching;

looked for 2

critical

incidents

Group A debriefed

w/ mentors and used

Critical Incident

analysis. Group B

edited videos for 2

critical incidents

and used same

reflection form as

Group A.

Not described Students who developed video

vignettes produced longer and

more multifaceted reflections.

Calandra, B.,

Gurvitch, R.,

& Lund J.

(2008).

10 preservice PR

teachers

Three 45-

minute lessons

were recorded

during

semester

Reported if they felt

the lesson was

successful and why;

created 3 minute

video clips for each

45-minute video to

support their

claim(s).

Used pattern matching

and cross case analysis

to analyze videos, edited

vignettes, and written

reflections

Congruence between vignette(s)

and written reflection(s); clips

were teacher-centered; focus on

management and verbal

instruction decreased across

cycles; reflection became more

explanatory across cycles


Video Analysis 31


Video


Collins, J. L.,

et. al (2004)

Students

enrolled in a

course on

teaching writing

for inservice and

pre-service

teachers

Teachers

videoed

themselves

teaching a

writing

strategy

Edited video to a 3-

6 minute

presentation; videos

were viewed by a

group of peers who

offered suggestions

Teachers reported on

whether they felt there

was educational value

added to the course

through the video

assignment.

Teachers thought that the video

reflection was highly valuable.

Cunningham,

A. &

Benedetto, S.

(2002)

Pre-service

teachers

Not described Participants edited

their videos to

create a meaningful,

reflective video.

Not described Teachers felt that the editing

process required them to be

critical of the clips they selected

to communicate their growth.

Teachers spent more time

selecting the clips than reflecting

on the video segments.

Cuper, P., et al.

(2007)

Pre-service

teachers at Keen

State College

One pre-

service teacher

video-taped

another pre-

service teacher

teaching.

Gradual Replay

Lens: watched their

video on their own;

met with their

supervisor;

replayed frames

related to a

particular lens

Not described Identified specific teaching

behaviors that they wanted to

change or keep; felt that

supervisory feedback was more

convincing


Video Analysis 32


Video


Dawson, P.J.,

Dawson, K. E.,

Forness, S.R.

(2001)

2 college

students enrolled

in a teaching

practicum

Teachers were

videotaped

through a one-

way mirror.

Videos were edited

to contain equal

amounts of effective

and ineffective

teaching behaviors.

Teachers were

asked questions

such as, ―What do

you think was going

on here?‖

Trained observers

compared the number of

effective and ineffective

behaviors exhibited by

the teachers before and

after viewing their

videos.

Teachers increased effective and

decreased ineffective teaching

behaviors after seeing the

videotaped sequence. Teachers

felt that the video feedback was

primarily responsible for the

change in their behavior.

Deasy, G., et.

al (1991) as

cited in Wang

& Hartley

(2003)

19 pre-service

teachers

Participants

videotaped

their teaching.

Viewed video and

were given

feedback about their

teaching as it related

to 8 teaching

behaviors that were

relevant to working

with behaviorally

disordered students

A participant survey was

administered at the end

of the study.

Teachers perceived the video

method as more helpful than the

traditional observation and

feedback method for identifying

gaps between their beliefs about

best practices and their actions.

Fox, D. L.,

Brantley-Dias,

L., & Calandra,

B. (2007)

24 English

Education

preservice

teachers

Created 2

vignettes to

demonstrate

their teaching

Used the Critical

Incident Reflection

guide (CIR), which

was modified from

Tripp's (1993) and

Griffin's (2003)

recommendations

Researchers analyzed

edited digital videos,

written reflections,

follow-up, and open-

ended questionnaires.

CIR enhanced the quality

of reflections. Writing

focus changed from

teacher-centered to student-

centered and from means-

based to ends-based.


Video Analysis 33


Video


Grainger, S.

(2004)

Not discussed Teachers were

videotaped.

Video Stimulated

Recall (VSR):

immediately after

the lesson, played

back the video and

teachers stopped

and commented on

decisions

Not described Viewing and talking about one's

own teaching is the best way to

access knowledge of one's own

purpose.

Griswold, S. L.

(2004)

13 K-8 inservice

teachers from

four different

schools within a

district

Teachers

videotaped

three thirty to

sixty minute

segments of

instruction and

chose a 10-15

minute clip to

share with

peers.

Teachers reflected

with their peers

after viewing the

video and reflected

in a journal

throughout the

process.

Used Teacher Video

Self-

Assessment/Reflective

Writing questionnaire,

teaching competency

form, journals,

professional

development form, and

concluding response

survey

Sharing videos of classroom

performances can be an effective

means for guiding professional

development. Viewing

videotapes altered the teachers‘

self perceptions.

Halter, C. P.

(2006)

67 intern

teachers

Pre-service

teachers were

videotaped

teaching a

lesson.

Pre-service teachers

wrote reflective

essays.

Compared reflective

essays. Questionnaires

and follow up interviews

were used to capture the

thoughts and beliefs

about reflection.

The type of reflective writing

remained consistent, but the

focus of the reflective writing

was affected. Teachers saw

value in using video, but viewed

feedback from supervisors as

more valuable than reflecting on

their own.


Video Analysis 34


Video


Hougham, P.

(1992)

Senior student

teachers placed

in local

elementary

schools

Videoed

during their

student

teaching;

viewed and

evaluated their

question

asking

strategies using

a form

Recorded tallies for

level of questions,

types (focusing,

probing, prompting,

and closure) of

questions, and

techniques

(redirecting and

wait time)

Trained observers tallied

the number of specific

questions asked and the

techniques used and

compared results over

time. Teachers rated the

value of the video

reflections.

Teachers who received video

evaluations improved their

question-asking strategies to a

greater degree than students who

did not receive video

evaluations. Teachers agreed

that videotaping was a beneficial

tool.

Jensen, R. A.,

et al. (1994)

Student teachers

majoring in

elementary

education, early

childhood

education, or

special education

Recorded three

different

teaching

samples;

reflected on

three different

skill areas

Open-ended

instruments focused

observations in

interpersonal skills,

instructional,

management, and

organizational

skills, and question

skills.

Teachers identified both

the assets and limitations

of their experiences.

Teachers assessed their

overall teaching

competencies through

use of the "Preservice

Teacher Reflection and

Self Analysis".

Difficult to consistently identify

strengths and growth areas;

focused observations produced

more helpful information than

self-assessments; need more

instruction and experience with

recording and reflection

Koorland, M.

A., et. al

(1985)

3 pre-service

teachers

Pre-service

teachers

videotaped

themselves and

mailed it to

their

supervisors.

Results on the

Florida

Measurement

System (FLPMS)

of effective and

ineffective teaching

behaviors was

discussed during a

conference call.

Researchers looked at

changes in frequency

counts on pre and post

scores on the FLPMS.

The video group performed

comparable to – if not superior to

– the control group.


Video Analysis 35


Video


Kapanja, E.

(2001)

40 curriculum

Studies and

Educational

Technology

students at the

University of

Ilorin in Nigeria.

The practicing

teacher's

micro-teaching

lesson was

recorded.

The participants met

with their

supervisor to watch

and discuss faults

that they noticed in

their teaching.

Pre- and Post-tests were

administered to the

participants. No

description of the tests

was given.

The video reflection group had

significant improvement over the

control group. The video group

was more confident and positive

about the micro-teaching lesson.

Krammer, K.,

et. al (2006)

20 pre-service

teachers from

Germany and

Switzerland

Recorded

mathematics

teaching

project

Pre-service teachers'

videos were

available online to

discuss the

"implemented

project and its

effects on the

students."

Used online "Mood

Barometer;"

administered two

surveys to examine the

change in instruction-

related teacher

cognitions; surveyed

teachers about the use of

instructional practices

Reflection on and discussion of

personal teaching videos was

deemed valuable by the teachers,

but the process was very time

consuming.

Lokey-Vega,

A. & Brantely-

Dias, L. (2006)

1 mentor; first

year Ed-Tech

teacher

A mentor and a

first-year

teacher

selected 1

videotaped

lesson to edit

and reflect on.

Used the Critical

Incident Reflection

protocol (Tripp,

1992) to guide

reflection

Collected and analyzed

written reflections,

video, and discussions

Assisted meaning feedback

conversations


Video Analysis 36


Video


Martin-

Reynolds, J.

(1980)

30 student

teachers were

recorded (18

experimental, 12

control)

Split Screen

Analysis with

one camera on

the teacher and

the other on

the students

Reviewed tape one

on their own; filled

out Video Self-

Report Form;

reviewed same tape

with their mentor;

second recording

was viewed just by

the student teacher

and another VSRF

was filled out

Used Flanders

Interaction Analysis to

analyze verbal

communication and

Love Roderick Scale for

non-verbal

communication; pre- and

post-tests were compared

Focus from Pre-test to Post-test

was dramatically shifted away

from self to students in both

groups, so treatment wasn't

effective; however, this shows

that something happened during

video analysis that caused the

shift.

Meade, P. &

Mc Meniman,

M. (1992)

1 chemistry

teacher

Videotaped

using two

cameras and a

vision mixer

which allowed

the researchers

to track the

teacher and

students in any

area of the

classroom

Four Video

Stimulated Recall

(VSR) sessions

Analyzed the sessions by

coding the comments

using Shulman's 6

categories of knowledge;

pre and post interviews

The process helped make the

teachers' implicit theories about

teaching explicit.


Video Analysis 37


Video


Miller, M. J.

(2009)

5 Preservice

Social Science

Teachers

Each

participant

videotaped at

least one of

their lessons

and viewed the

videotape on

their own.

2- to 3-hour seminar

with five to six

peers; used the

Critical Friends

Group protocol to

guide problem-

based

conversations:

shared a 10–15-

minute segment of

teaching video

Analyzed interviews,

observations, videotapes,

discussion transcripts,

lesson plans, reflective

papers, and student

work; looked for codes

and patterns; used

constant comparison.

Teachers learned how to adapt

lesson models to meet student

needs, generalize beyond

particular problems for future

teaching, and clarify and

challenge their teaching practices

and assumptions about learning.

Miller, M., &

Carney, J.

(2008)

Not described Not described Teachers used

Video Traces to

record in-the-

moment responses

to their teaching

videos.

Not described Allowed access to real artifacts

of practice; slow downed the

teaching event; filtered the

complexity of teacher

interactions; allowed mentors to

correct misinterpretations and

extend interpretations


Video Analysis 38


Video


Miyata, H.,

(2002)

Elementary

education

preservice

teachers at

Shiga University

in Japan

Recorded at

least three

lessons (first

video during

the first two

weeks in the

schools,

second video

by week four,

and third video

by week six)

Participants used a

reflection

instrument that

focused on

classroom

environment,

communication

skills, and teaching

procedures.

Not described Teachers felt the process helped

them improve their ability to

monitor and adjust their

practices. Optimum learning

occurred when the student and

college supervisor viewed and

discussed the video together.

Nicol, C. &

Crespo, S.

(2004)

10 students from

a problem-based

cohort

Not described

Students created a

digital case in the

form of a web page

that stemmed from

the student's

particular inquiry

question and

consisted of edited

video data linked

with analysis.

Analyzed a case study of

one student in the cohort

The participant was able to

sensitize herself to what she

wanted to attend to. The

participants‘ inquiries seemed to

be prompted by the opportunity

to ask her own question about

her teaching.


Video Analysis 39


Video


Pailliotet,

A.W. (1995)

Pre-service

teachers

Pre-service

teachers were

videotaped

teaching a

lesson.

Teachers analyzed

their videos

according to three

levels: literal

observation,

interpretations, and

evaluation and

application. They

shared their

observations with

the whole group.

Data were analyzed for

common themes.

Deep viewing helped preservice

teachers to examine their

personal beliefs about teaching.

Powell, E.

(2005)

6 experienced

teachers working

on an in-service

MA

Teachers were

videoed for 30

minutes while

they were

teaching with

active learning

strategies.

Teachers used a

reflective

framework that

focused on

intentions, self-

awareness, practical

and technical

reflection,

perceptual

awareness and

critical reflection.

The reflective dialogues

were audiotaped and

transcribed.

Transcriptions were

coded using NVIVO.

Teachers‘ tacit assumptions

about active learning were made

explicit. Video sequences

provided teachers with a context

for investigating dimensions of

their professional practice.


Video Analysis 40


Video


Preston, M.

(2004)

39 students from

various

departments

Recorded

lesson and

embedded

clips directly in

the body of an

essay

Wrote multi-media

essays for each of

the first nine weeks

(connected video

content with the

readings, identified

implications for

classroom practice,

and asked questions

that could be

addressed in class)

14/39 students felt

writing the essays was

helpful and appreciated

the ability to view,

excerpt, and annotate the

videos.

Students were universally

positive about having the ability

to watch the videos wherever

and whenever they chose.

Students were better prepared for

lectures each week.

Preston, M. D.,

et. al (2005)

Graduate

students in a

development of

mathematical

thinking course

Designed a

mathematical

activity;

recorded

themselves

carrying it out

with a child

and

interviewing

the child

afterward

Used Video

Interactions for

Teaching and

Learning (VITAL)

to analyze their

video; wrote

multimedia essays

Students completed a

self-evaluation.

Student should be more

accustomed to obtaining

evidence and using critical

thinking skills to support

decision making.


Video Analysis 41


Video


Prusak, K., et

al., 2010.

Pre-service

teachers enrolled

in PE teaching

courses

While one

student teacher

was teaching,

another student

teacher

videoed the

lesson.

Used Studio Code

to code their own

teaching videos

with 15 codes that

were previously

introduced when

they analyzed

expert teaching

videos

Researchers randomly

selected 15 coded

instances. For each

instance, the researcher

determined whether or

not the code label was an

accurate representation

of the video segment.

Students could only moderately

code their video like an expert,

but they still obtained valuable

insights into their own teaching

practice.

Rich, P. J., &

Hannafin, M.

J. (2008a)

4 elementary

education

student teachers

Used Video

Analysis Tool

(VAT) 3 times

throughout

their student

teaching to

analyze their

instructional

decisions

Used the Video

Analysis Tool

(VAT) to upload

video and reflect on

their teaching;

looked at

instructional

decisions and

changes, but

determined their

own focus

VAT comments and

participant Interviews

Instructional Decisions were

student-centered when they

focused on pedagogical

strategies and were teacher-

centered when focusing on

administrative issues.


Video Analysis 42


Video


Rich, P. J. &

Hannafin, M.

J. (2008b)

4 elementary

education

student teachers

Used Video

Analysis Tool

(VAT) 3 times

throughout

their student

teaching to

analyze their

instructional

decisions

Reflected using the

VAT; consulted

with their mentor

teacher; recorded

another video where

they were to make

changes; coded their

video; reflected on

the video with their

mentor

VAT comments;

participant interviews w/

preservice and mentor

teachers; archival

documents (e.g., lesson

plans, student work)

Teachers preferred to choose

their own focus for reflection.

Participants chose to defer

judgment until they could view

their videos.

Suggestions/recommendations

made by mentors were most

influential.

Rich, P. &

Hannafin, M.

J. (2009)

3 elementary

education

preservice

teachers

Recorded

themselves;

reflected on

their video;

identified

specific

changes;

recorded

themselves

again;

analyzed it;

presented their

findings

Teachers used the

Video Analysis

Tool and their own

self-created lens as

a guide to reflect on

their teaching.

Video Analysis Tool

comments; interviews;

class presentation;

teaching documents

Video analysis allowed teachers

to "step back and see" their

teaching in a non-cognitively

threatening way.


Video Analysis 43


Video


Romano, M.,

& Schwartz, J.

(2005)

10 first year

teachers

Videotaped 3

times during

their first year

Used different

technologies

(electronic

portfolios, online

discussion board,

and video) to reflect

on their own

teaching

3 Open-ended interviews

(following video-taping),

electronic portfolios,

surveys, online

discussion board

transcripts

Teachers indicated that

videotaping was the most

important means for facilitating

reflection because it helped them

to "see mannerisms" and make

changes in their teaching.

Rosaen, C. L.,

et al (2008)

3 elementary

interns (2 first

grade and one

3rd grade)

Taped twice in

eight weeks

Wrote reflections on

lessons without

watching the video;

watched videos and

chose excerpts to

analyze (No prompt

was given to focus

reflection)

Teacher interviews;

reflection (reflections

were chunked into ideas

or topics, then

segmented and divided

into two categories,

management and

instruction, and then into

two sub categories)

Video-based reflection was more

specific. It discussed

instructional elements rather than

behavioral and paid more

attention to students rather than

self.

Rosaen, C. L.,

Lundeberg,

M., Terpstra,

M., Cooper,

M., Fu, J., &

Niu, R. (in

press)

4 four interns

earning a

baccalaureate

degree

Created a

video case of

their

discussion-

based science

teaching

Created a video case

of teaching;

reflected on it

Baseline interview

(allowed interns to share

ideas on reflection and

their perceptions of the

tasks); design interview

(allowed for open ended

questions); final

interview

Teachers benefited both in terms

of what they noticed and in how

they reasoned about their

teaching. There were changes in

their frame of mind towards

using video as a tool to facilitate

change.


Video Analysis 44


Video


Saxena, A., &

Stevens, R.

(2007)

Preservice

(student

teachers) and

inservice

teachers

Student

teachers were

videotaped.

Video Traces were

used to review the

videos and make

comments and ask

questions. In-

service teachers and

faculty responded to

the video and

comments with their

own ideas.

Looked at and analyzed

the conversation that

came about from the

videos

Video Traces supported novice

teachers in their actual

classrooms. Video Traces

creates a "third space" to bring

preservice and inservice teachers

together.

Schmidt, C. P.

&

McCutcheon,

J. W. (1994) as

cited in Wang

& Hartley

(2003)

180 preservice

teachers

Eight

preservice

teachers were

videotaped,

and 180

preservice

teachers helped

evaluate their

performance.

Preservice teachers

assessed the videos

using the Classroom

Procedures

Evaluation Form

and Adjective

Checklist.

Not described The self-videotaped assessments

were effective in helping

preservice teachers capture and

assess the teaching behaviors.


Video Analysis 45


Video


Senger, E.S.

(1998)

2 elementary

school teachers

The researcher

observed and

recorded 10

mathematics

lessons.

Previewed their

lesson and made

note of segments

they wanted to

discuss; met with

the researcher to

reflect on their

video lessons

Video and Theory

reflection methods were

compared. Reflection

sessions were

videotaped, and follow

up interviews were

conducted. The data

were analyzed for

common themes.

Both methods were useful in

understanding teachers' tacit

beliefs and the relationship of

belief to practice and for

encouraging teacher change.

Sharpe, L., et.

al (2003)

Preservice

teachers

Teachers

recorded

themselves and

selected a three

minute clip to

share.

Teachers had a live

video conference

with peers and

university

supervisors.

Pre-service teachers

filled out a questionnaire

about the technical and

pedagogical advantages

and disadvantages of

Multipoint Desktop

Video Conferencing

(MVDC).

Felt that the video clips should

have been longer; watching

themselves and their peers was

beneficial; it was necessary to

scaffold the teachers' reflections


Video Analysis 46


Video


Shepherd, C.

E., &

Hannafin, M.

J. (2008)

3 preservice

social studies

teachers (2

female and 1

male)

Recorded an

entire class

session of

themselves

teaching;

analyzed active

engagement;

repeated the

process three

times

Reflective questions

helped participants

to review how their

instruction was

supposed to

influence active

engagement,

whether or not it

did, and what they

would do differently

next time to

promote it.

Video recordings;

answers to reflection

questions; teacher

interviews

Considered diverse classroom

perspectives that had not been

considered previously;

developed improvement plans;

change their opinions of teaching

outcomes based on examination

of video evidence

Shepherd, C.

E., &

Hannafin, M.

J. (2009)

6 preservice

social studies

teachers during

their final

semester of the

program

Recorded their

teaching when

they

implemented

an active

learning

technique;

repeated the

process

minimum of

three times

Reflective questions

helped teachers to

identify an area of

active engagement

to focus on. A

rubric regarding

techniques was

completed.

Teachers indicated

what they would do

differently next

time.

Video recordings;

portfolio answers; self-

completed rubrics;

teacher interviews

Examined classroom events from

a different vantage point;

considered alternative causes of

classroom phenomena; identified

missed actions from students;

reconsidered strategies to

increase student engagement


Video Analysis 47


Video


Sherin, M. G.

& van Es, E.

A. (2005)

2 studies--a: 4

middle school

math teachers b:

12 preservice

high school math

and science

teachers.

a: Year-long

series of video

club meetings

(10 meetings)

b: used VAST

to analyze

student

thinking,

teacher roles,

and classroom

discourse

a: Open ended

questions with all

teachers involved

during meetings b:

narrative essay

discussing video

from own classroom

one month prior to

and one month after

VAST exposure

Coded transcribed videos

and narrative essays

Focus shifted from pedagogy to

student thinking and identified

specific features instead of the

overall chronology of the clips.

Analysis became more

interpretive instead of evaluative

and more evidence-based.

Sherin, M. G.

& van Es, E.

A. (2009)

Group 1: 4

middle school

math teachers;

Group 2: 7 4th

and 5th grade

math teachers

Math lessons

were recorded

and then

watched and

discussed at

monthly

meetings.

Video clubs:

teachers met

monthly to watch

and discuss video

clips from their

classes.

Observed changes in

conversations; examined

the influence of the

video club in regards to

thinking outside of the

meetings; coded

discussions

Increased focus on interpreting

student mathematical thinking

over time; looked at a wider

range of factors rather than just

pedagogy; knowledge based

reasoning was developed

Spurgeon, S. &

Bowen, J. L.

(2002)

22 student

teachers

Student

teachers were

recorded.

Student teachers

used video editing

(iMoive) to critique

their teaching

performance.

Student teachers

identified one

competency they wished

to have evaluated. The

teachers' written

reflections were

examined and compared

with the control group.

Although the difference between

the groups was not significant,

researchers still believe that

using multimedia portfolios will

increase teachers' critical

reflections.


Video Analysis 48


Video


Stadler, H.

(2003)

Pre-service

teachers

Not described Not described Interviews with teachers,

reflective papers, video

analysis of group work,

feedback from students,

classroom observations,

student-teacher

discussions during video

feedback sessions

The quality of reflective papers

improved. Teachers felt that the

experience was a valuable part of

their professional development.

Storeygard, J.

& Fox, B.

(1995)

Fifth grade

teacher

Videotaped her

math lessons

for three years

Reflected on her

lessons with her

colleagues during

their seminars;

specifically looked

for ways to increase

student talk during

her lessons

Interviews with the

teacher, journal writings,

classroom and seminar

observations

The teacher felt that she made

progress toward her goals. Word

count of teacher talk compared

to student talk revealed that after

three years the teacher

dominated the students'

discussions less.

Struyk, L. R.

& McCoy, L.

H. (1993)

Preservice

teachers

Classroom

teachers

videotaped the

preservice

teacher's lesson

by panning the

camera across

the classroom

in 20 second

time sweeps.

Teachers watched

the video and

recorded behaviors

that appeared during

each 20 second

interval and tallied

the total number of

occurrences.

Not described

Allowed teachers to focus on

strengths and weaknesses;

evaluate teaching as often and as

many times as desired; did not

need a supervisor to receive

feedback; less threatening than

evaluation by a supervisor


Video Analysis 49


Video


Thomson, W.

S.(1992)

Reported on

two studies

(study a)

Student teachers Teachers

videotaped

themselves and

mailed the

tapes to a

faculty

supervisory

team

The tapes were

evaluated by the

team using the

Florida Performance

Measurement

System (FPRMS).

After the conference

the supervisor

called the student

teacher to provide

feedback.

Not described Student teachers who used video

feedback performed in a

comparable and in some cases a

superior manner to those who

received the conventional

treatment.

Thomson, W.

S.(1992)

Reported on

two studies.

(study b)

26 preservice

teachers

The students

were observed

by a content

specialist from

their field and

recorded while

teaching.

Teachers evaluated

their video using

behaviors defined in

North Carolina's

Teacher

Performance

Appraisal

Instrument (TPAI).

Compared and

contrasted the

effectiveness of

supervisor feedback and

self-criticism using

videotapes

There were more positive

reactions than negative reactions

to the process. Participants felt

that optimal learning occurred

when they were able to view and

discuss their video with their

supervisor.

Tripp, T. R.

(2009)

1 student teacher

and her

supervisor

Recorded three

lessons and

analyzed them

with Media

Notes

Used several

INTASC standards

to guide her

reflection. After

analyzing her video,

she met with her

instructor to discuss

her analysis.

Observations of video

and traditional

conferences and

interviews were used to

compare the video

conferences with

traditional post lesson

conferences.

Video helped the teacher notice

things in her teaching that she

had not remembered, focused the

analysis on specific teaching

areas, and provided evidence to

support discussions


Video Analysis 50


Video


van Es, E. A.,

& Sherin, M.

G. (2002)

4 middle school

mathematics

teachers

Teachers met

monthly for a

year to watch

and discuss

video clips

The researcher

facilitated the

meetings using

open-ended

questions.

Video clubs were

videotaped and

discussion was analyzed.

There was a shift in what the

teachers noticed. There was a

shift in how the teachers

discussed what they noticed.

Viiri, J. &

Saari, H.

(2006)

4 student

teachers, 2

experienced

teachers, 1 tutor

Recorded a 45-

minute lesson

Watched lesson

with researchers;

explained reasons

for changes in talk

type

Categorized the type of

teacher talk

New teachers used monotonous

talk type and didn't plan for

teacher talk type during lessons.

They needed more time to

practice and discuss teacher talk.

Warden, B. J.

(2004)

15 preservice

teachers

Teachers were

videotaped

teaching a

lesson.

Teachers identified

each indicator of the

Oklahoma Criteria

for Effective

Teaching and

Administrative

Performance.

Researchers looked at

the level of significance

between the pre- and

post-tests.

There was a significant

difference between the video

group's pre- and post-tests, but

there was not a significant

difference between the groups

that used video reflections and

those that did not use video.

Wedman, J.

M., Espinosa,

L. M., &

Laffey, J.

(1999)

2 undergraduate

students, 8

elementary

teachers, 1

secondary

teacher

Recorded two

teaching

episodes that

were 15

minutes in

length

Reviewed videos

for the influence

class setting and the

lesson had on

students ; met with

the researcher to

discuss video;

responded to

questions

Teaching beliefs

questionnaire, videotapes

of two teaching events,

videos of the reflective

conference, two post

teaching reflective

conferences, and a

portfolio presentation

Teachers grew in their abilities

to learn from experience and

begin new practices. Videos

helped teachers focus on

behaviors that needed to change.


Video Analysis 51


Video


Welsch, R. G.,

& Devlin, P.

A. (2004)

Preservice

teachers in a

special education

course (26

Undergraduates

and 6 graduates)

The

experimental

group was

videotaped

teaching, and

then they

reviewed the

video after

they taught.

Teachers answered

six reflective

questions. The

control group did

memory based

reflection, whereas

the experimental

group used the

video in conjunction

with their reflection.

Responses to each

question were reviewed

and given a score using a

common scoring sheet

by multiple reviewers.

There was a slightly higher mean

score on reflective practices

when doing video based

reflection than those doing

memory based reflections.

Teachers reported that the videos

were useful in their reflective

practices.

Wright, G. A.

(2008)

Pilot study = 7

inservice

teachers; main

study = 6

inservice

teachers (1

principal in both)

Recorded 5

teaching

evidences and

then analyzed

their

performance

using media

notes.

Used the Utah

Professional

Teaching Standards

and the Alpine SD

SET (Scales for

Effective Teaching

Standards)

Compared paper

reflections with video

based reflections:

analyzed teacher surveys

and observations

Teachers believed the video

enhanced process increased the

amount of things they noticed

about their teaching, increased

the ability to reflect by focusing

their reflections, and

consequently helped them set

goals.

Yerrick, R.,

Ross, D., &

Molebash P.

(2005)

Preservice

teachers

Teachers made

the videos

from their own

teaching (5

minute digital

video products

were made

from 90 minute

clips of

teaching).

Reflected on their

teaching through the

videos they created;

picked out

important aspects

they wanted to point

out or discuss

Collected personal video

reflections that showed

individual learning

outcomes; performed a

final exit interview with

each pre-service teacher

Digital video projects shifted

preservice teachers' thinking

from themselves to children's

thinking. Teachers adjusted their

planning and instruction based

upon lessons learned.


Video Analysis and Teacher Change 52

Article 2: The Influence of Video Analysis on the Process of Teacher Change

Running head: VIDEO ANALYSIS AND TEACHER CHANGE

The Influence of Video Analysis on the Process of Teacher Change

Tonya R. Tripp



Abstract

There is limited research addressing how video analysis influences the changes teachers make to

their teaching practices. Since the purpose of reflection is to improve teaching, it is essential to

understand how video influences teacher change. The purpose of this study was to gain an in

depth understanding of how video influences the process of teacher change. The results of this

study may help researchers and educators understand how video can be used to encourage

teacher improvement. Each teacher made changes to their teaching practices after participating

in the video analysis process. Six-overarching themes emerged throughout the change process.

Teachers reported that video encouraged change because it helped them: (a) focus their analysis,

(b) see their teaching from a new perspective, (c) trust the feedback they received, (d) feel

accountable to change their practice, (e) remember to implement changes, and (f) see their

progress.


Introduction

Since Schön (1983) published ―The Reflective Practitioner,‖ reflection has been an

integral part of most teacher training programs. Currently, the National Council for Accreditation

of Teacher Education (NCATE), the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC), and the

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Curriculum (INTASC)— three organizations

that are at the vanguard of certifying and assuring teacher quality—all include reflective practice

as a key component to improving teacher quality (Rich & Hannafin, 2009). Despite the

preponderance of reflective practices in assuring teacher quality, research on reflective practices

has not generated a solid base for understanding the effect that reflective practices have had on

teaching. There is a need to explore not merely the content of reflection, but the effect reflection

has on teachers changing their practices (Korthagen & Wubbels, 2001). The purpose of this

study was to examine how video analysis influenced the process that led teachers to change their

teaching.

Video Analysis Review

Researchers and educators have reported that video reflection can be an effective

feedback strategy for helping instructors to improve their teaching (Penny & Coe, 2004).

Recently, several institutions have developed video analysis tools that make the process of

viewing, analyzing, and sharing videos easier for instructors (Rich & Hannafin, 2009). Video

analysis tools are emerging as an increasingly viable and accessible tool to facilitate teacher

reflection. Consequently, there has been an increase in research studies focused on the benefits of

using video to reflect on teaching. These studies have consistently reported that video is

beneficial for helping instructors reflect on their teaching. Reported benefits typically fall under

two general categories: improved ability to evaluate teaching and changes made to teaching.


Improved Ability to Evaluate Teaching

Most studies reported that using video to reflect was beneficial for helping teachers to

evaluate their teaching. After using video to reflect, teachers were able to: (a) identify gaps

between their beliefs about good teaching and their actual teaching practices, (b) articulate their

tacit assumptions and purposes about teaching and learning, (c) notice things about their teaching

that they did not remember, (d) focus their reflections on multiple aspects of classroom teaching,

and (e) assess the strengths and weaknesses of their teaching.

Several studies reported that using video to reflect helped teachers to identify gaps

between their beliefs about good teaching and their actual teaching practices (Bryan & Recesso,

2006; Miyata, 2002; Pailliotet, 1995; Griswold, 2004; Grainger, 2004; Rich and Hannafin, 2008).

For example, student teachers in Bryan & Recesso wrote a belief statement about what they

considered to be good teaching. Throughout the semester, teachers videoed themselves and used

the Video Analysis Tool (VAT) to identify contradictions or confirmations of their teacher belief

statement. Researchers reported that, ―prospective teachers became cognizant of tensions in their

teaching‖ (p. 36), pointing to specific examples of when preservice teachers‘ actual teaching

conflicted with their conception of ideal teaching.

Video analysis also helped teachers articulate their tacit assumptions and purposes

regarding teaching and learning (Meade & Meriman, 1992; Powell, 2005). Teachers in Powell

reviewed a video of their teaching and marked three segments to share with the researcher.

Powell reported that video analysis helped teachers articulate their feelings about their teaching

and make their tacit assumptions about learning explicit. The teacher in Meade and Meriman

also became better at articulating his purposes for making specific instructional decisions as he

used video to review his teaching.


Other studies reported video allowed teachers to notice certain aspect of their teaching

which they did not remember (Dye, 2007; Griswold, 2004; Pailliotet, 1995; Rich & Hannafin,

2007). Teachers often commented, ―I never saw that before‖ (Pailliotet, p. 155). Studies

reported that video analysis was beneficial because it allowed teachers to compare their teaching

videos to what they remembered about their lesson.

Halter (2006) and Sherin and van Es (2005) noticed that the focus of teachers‘ reflections

changed when they used video analysis. The teachers in Halter completed a reflection guide as

they viewed their videos. The focus of the teachers‘ reflections shifted from purely pedagogy to

both pedagogy and classroom interactions. The teachers in Sherin and van Es met once or twice

a month with other teachers to review their videos. Researchers facilitated discussions by using

the videos as a springboard to ask the teachers questions about their teaching and their students‘

thinking. Over time, the teachers‘ comments focused more on interpreting classroom events

rather than evaluating their practices.

Several studies also reported that video helped instructors assess the strengths and

weaknesses of their teaching (Rich & Hannafin, 2007; Schmidt & McCutcheon, 1994; Struyk &

McCoy, 1993; Tripp, 2009). For example, teachers in Struyk and McCoy watched a video of

their teaching and coded the number of times certain behaviors occurred. Teachers were able to

use the information they gained from the evaluation to prioritize problem areas in their teaching.

Teachers also reported that video was beneficial because it allowed teachers to evaluate

themselves as many times as they wanted, and teachers did not need a supervisor or colleague

present to receive feedback on their teaching (Tripp, 2009).


Overall, past studies indicated that video was beneficial for helping instructors evaluate

their teaching. Teachers felt that video improved their ability to identify their assumptions about

teaching and learning, understand the strengths and weaknesses of their teaching, and prioritize

the improvements they needed to make to their future teaching.

Changes Made to Teaching

Previous studies also reported that teachers increased effective teaching behaviors as a

result of video reflections. Teachers in Houghman (1992) viewed videos of their teaching and

evaluated their question-asking strategies using an observation form. Teachers who used video

evaluations improved their question-asking strategies to a greater degree than teachers who did

not receive video evaluations. Sherin and van Es (2005) reported that teachers who participated

in video clubs changed their questioning strategies and provided more time for students to share

and comment on each other‘s work. Brawdy and Byra (1994) noticed that preservice teachers

increased the frequency of their positive specific statements and modified the frequency of their

positive general statements they provided to the learners. Additionally, Rich, Recesso,

Allexsaht-Snider, and Hannafin (2007) felt that video analysis helped teachers develop a course

of action for future teaching situations. Although previous studies reported that teachers

increased effective teaching behaviors as a result of participating in video reflections, studies did

not describe how video influenced the process that led teachers to change their teaching.

Unaddressed Issues and Future Research

Most studies that examined the impact of using video analysis to reflect on teaching

reported that video analysis was beneficial for helping teachers evaluate their teaching. Yet, few

studies actually described how video impacted the teacher change process. Schön (1983) stated

that reflection involves more than understanding the teaching situation; reflection should also


lead the teacher to action. Teachers must ―determine the directions in which they will try to

change‖ (Schön, 1983, p. 165). Many prominent reflection theories also claim that reflection

should involve change and an evaluation of the change (Taggart & Wilson, 1998). Currently, we

do not know very much about how video analysis influences the process of teacher change. The

primary focus of this study was to examine how video reflection affects the process that led

teachers to change their teaching. The results of this study may help researchers and educators

understand how video can be used to encourage teacher improvement.

Method

A multiple case-study approach was used for this study. Stake (1995) described case

studies as ―the study of the particularity and complexity of a single case, coming to understand

its activity within important circumstances‖ (p. xi). A multiple case study approach was

appropriate for this research project because it allowed the researcher to focus on understanding

the depth of a few cases where instructors used video analysis tools to improve their teaching.

Seven cases of teachers engaging in video reflection practices were used in this study. The data

collection and analysis was focused on understanding how the use of video tools influenced the

process that led teachers to change their teaching.

Procedures

This study took place over two months. Figure 3.1 shows the steps that were used during

the study.

Set up. The first week of the study was spent setting up the process. The researcher met

with the teachers to explain the procedures. The researcher also discussed goal setting with each

of the participants. Media Notes was downloaded to the teachers‘ computers, and they were

trained to use the tool.


Figure 1. Procedures used during the study.

Media Notes is a video analysis tool that allows users to upload, tag, and annotate

segments of the video (see Figure 3). Media Notes was chosen over other video analysis tools

because the coding and search options make it better for data mining. Additionally, it is free for

BYU students and faculty who are conducting research with teachers.

Figure 2. Screenshot of a Teacher‘s Self-Analysis in MediaNotes


After teachers became familiar with MediaNotes, they selected peer(s) or supervisor(s) to

meet with them to discuss their video analyses. Finally, the teachers set a flexible, regular

schedule (e.g., every other Monday) for recording their teaching and discussing their analyses.

Record teaching. During the following weeks, the teachers continued to work on their

teaching goals. Teachers recorded a lesson with digital cameras provided by the researcher.

Teachers were allowed to record any lesson they felt would be beneficial to analyze. After

recording the lesson, the teachers imported the video into MediaNotes.

Analyze teaching. Teachers used MediaNotes to analyze their video. The teachers chose

three to four codes to use during their analysis. These codes were based on the goals they set for

improving their teaching. Some examples included checking for understanding, pacing, active

participation, student cues, etc. As the teachers analyzed their videos, they coded and commented

on video clips that provided evidence of when they met or did not meet their goals. A reflection

guide was provided to the teachers. Teachers then chose specific clips to share with their

discussion group.

Discuss analysis. Discussions were usually held in a casual setting in the teacher‘s

workplace. The teachers often sat on the floor or a couch next to each other and shared their

video clips from their laptops. During the discussions, teachers gave a brief explanation of the

background of their lesson and introduced the video clips they planned to show. Teachers often

presented a question about their teaching and then showed a few video clips that highlighted the

question. The group discussed the clips with the teacher and offered suggestions for future

teaching situations. Researchers also provided a discussion guide to facilitate conversation.

After group feedback, teachers refined their goals, set a new goal, or continued working on the

same goal. The researchers tried to remain a non-participant observer during the discussions.


However, the teachers often asked questions and shared their experiences with the researchers

before and after their discussions.

Participants

Teachers were chosen from several instructional settings in order to identify common

patterns across a variety of teaching contexts. There were seven participants in all: Three Special

Ed teachers, two Religious Ed teachers, and two English Language Learner (ELL) teachers. The

teachers were Caucasian females between 23-35 years of age. Their teaching experience ranged

from one to eight and a half years, and their students ranged in age from 3-18 years. All of the

teachers volunteered to participate in the video analysis process.

Special education teachers. Rachel1, Jen, and Amy taught autistic children at a private

school. Rachel had been teaching special education students for eight years, and this was her

second year teaching at the school. This was both Jen and Amy‘s first year teaching at the

school. Previously, Amy was a volunteer at the school, and Jen taught fourth grade in a public

school. Students at the school were divided by their developmental level. Rachel taught

students functioning at the highest level. Amy taught students functioning at the middle level,

and Jen taught the lowest functioning students. The three teachers chose to meet together to

discuss their analyses.

Religious education teachers. Erin and Kathryn were employed by the Church of Jesus

Christ of Latter day Saints to teach religious education classes to high school students. At the

time, they were teaching New Testament to four classes each day. Kathryn had been teaching for

almost nine years, and Erin had been teaching for ten years. After a casual conversation about the

1 All names are pseudonyms


video analysis tool, MediaNotes, Erin and Kathryn asked if they could use it to analyze their

teaching. Erin and Kathryn chose to discuss their analyses together.

English Language Learner (ELL) teachers. Melissa and Betsy taught at an English

Language Center, and this was their first time teaching ELL students. Melissa had experience

teaching in small group settings, but was a little nervous about how her teaching experience

would transfer to a new situation. In addition to teaching at the ELL, Betsy taught English to

Japanese students online. This was her first time teaching in a face to face environment. Betsy

was nervous about teaching and thought video analysis would help her improve. Melissa and

Betsy chose to discuss their videos with their supervisors. Betsy also discussed her videos with

another colleague.

Data Collection

Observations. The researcher observed the teachers‘ video discussions with their peers

or supervisor. During this time, the researcher was a non-participant observer who made

observational notes during the video meetings. During the observations, the researcher sought to

understand how teachers were using the video analysis tool to change their teaching practices.

The conversations during the observations were recorded and transcribed. Written notes were

also used to answer the observation questions. The researcher asked participants follow-up

questions after each observation in order to clarify additional questions that arose.

Interviews. The researcher conducted semi-structured interviews with participants after

they had repeated the video analysis process four times. The interviews lasted between 20-45

minutes. The purpose of the interview questions was to understand how the use of the video

analysis tool influenced the process that led teachers to change their teaching. The interview

questions were flexible to allow the participants to discuss additional points of interest.


Artifacts. The researcher reviewed the video analysis clips and written comments in

order to understand how teachers used video analysis to change their teaching. Video clips were

also reviewed to look at how the instructors implemented the changes they decided to make to

their teaching.

Data Analysis

Domain and taxonomic analysis, as recommended by Spradley (1980) for analyzing case

studies, was used for this project. The data were reviewed to look for common themes that

appeared. Then NVIVO was used to code the data according to the domains that were

indentified. The data were re-coded to identify sub-themes for each of the domains. The

researcher reviewed the data to identify issues that were consistently raised by participants or

appeared to be very important to a participant. These themes became the sub domains. During

the analysis process, the researcher looked for negative cases that contradicted the sub domains.

When negative cases were identified, the researcher adjusted the themes and recoded the data.

After a final list of domains and sub domains was created, the data were re-coded a final time.

The resulting taxonomic structure is represented in figure 3.

Findings

As teachers used video analysis to reflect on their teaching, they reported a change

process consisting of the following steps: (a) recognizing the need to change, (b) brainstorming

ideas for change, (c) implementing the ideas, and (d) evaluating changes that were implemented.

Teachers said that video analysis was beneficial at each of these stages (see Table 1) and that

they were more likely to change their teaching practices when they used video analysis to reflect

than previous feedback methods they had used to improve their teaching (e.g., personal

reflections, classroom observations, workshops, etc.). The following sections discuss how video


Figure 3. Taxonomic Analysis of the Change Process

analysis influenced each of the four steps in the change process. Each section begins with a brief

summary. Then a table of common themes that emerged from the data is presented, followed by

evidence to support each of the themes.

Recognize the Need to Change

The first step in the change process was for teachers to recognize the need to change. Teachers

felt that it was beneficial to analyze their video in MediaNotes because the tool allowed them to

watch their video multiple times, gain a new perspective on their teaching, and focus their

reflection. After using MediaNotes, teachers commented that they were more likely to change


Table 1

Reported Benefits of Video Throughout the Change Process

Group Participant Recognize Need Brainstorming Implementing Ideas Evaluating

Religious

Education

Erin If you have the

video, you can

watch yourself

again and see oh,

I didn‘t realize I

do that.

Video is so much easier than

trying to explain it all and then

ask for suggestions.

As I‘m teaching, and I‘m standing

by my podium, I‘ll see the video in

my head, and I‘ll move because the

scene comes to my mind of just

standing there and thinking I need to

be moving.

Video gave me more

concrete examples to

whether I had done

good or bad so it was

more than just a

feeling

Kathryn The video

analysis helps

me be

more…recognize

reality.

I think getting other people's

input helps the most because you

can only see yourself so much

and then after awhile you‘re like

I'm doing great. But then

someone will give you a little

more to make it that much better

Specifically because of watching

something that Erica did and a

recommendation she made when she

watched mine, the last couple weeks

went so much better.

I think it‘s proof. It‘s

physical proof right

there where you could

actually see it and

address it.

Special

Education

Rachel It helped you see

certain things

that you weren‘t

realizing before.

I think the video really helped

me to give feedback on

specifically what they were trying

to target and specifically what

they were trying to look at.

After the first video I thought well,

let‘s try something like this, and it

worked really well. There‘s a little

bit of that pressure to say, see look I

can take your suggestions.

And then obviously,

obviously there were

changes made because

you can see from

video to video the

difference in the

participation level.



Special

Education

Amy

Video analysis

causes you to

really look.

Really, really,

look and realize

that that‘s not

good or that

wasn‘t a smart

choice to make.

When you take one general

problem to another teacher, but

they can't see it, and you can't

really explain it to them the way

you saw it, their suggestions are

too general.

It almost forces you to have to set

goals and follow through with the

things that you said and things that

other people commented on because

they'd like to see a change but you

want to see a change and you want

to see the change in the child. I

want to see change in my teaching

but then more importantly I want to

see the kind of changes that occur in

the child because of the changes that

I make.

I was just more

pleased when the

video was done and I

saw that I was fun.

Jen This was a good

way to actually

pinpoint things.

You can see it and their

suggestion is more relevant right

at that very moment because you

remember what it felt like to be in

there at that very moment.

When you just think, ‗Hey, I should

make that change,‘ it‘s harder to

actually do it than if you see

yourself do it and say, ‗Oh I really

need to do that.‘ Knowing that

you‘re going to be videoed again,

and you have to watch it again, I

think makes me more apt to change.

After showing her

video she said, "That

was ten times better."

English

Language

Learners

Melissa

If I watch it, I

realize it, and I

take notes about

it, and I'm trying.

I think the video helps because

we can say, 'Oh, stop, rewind, let

me see that again,' or we can all

say, ' Remember that part when . .

. ' so having it on the video, it‘s

all focused on whatever the

camera was focused on at that

time, so we can all reference the

same things

It gives you an opportunity to

change specific things that you want

to change, and it's not something

that a mentor is telling you to

change or something that a teacher is

telling you to change, but it is

something that you are really

looking at in your own teaching and

finding that you want to change.

I felt like I was doing

one thing, but I

wanted to see, actually

see, what was

happening.

Table 1 (Continued)



English

Language

Learners

Betsy

I don't think I

can change it if I

don't notice it.

I can tag little parts of the video

and then have someone watch it

and the other people might see

something different that I didn‘t

see myself.

Without video I might have just

gone the whole semester not really

focused on anything specific and

just kind of taught and tried to get

better at teaching in general, but not

really able to change anything

specific.

It can boost my

confidence because I

think oh good, I am

teaching alright, I am

getting to be a better

teacher than I thought

I was. So it is a good

thing for my self

confidence. That and

people can‘t really

show me without me

seeing myself.

Table 1 (Continued)


their practices than after participating in other feedback methods because video allowed them to

literally ―see‖ the need to change with their own eyes. Table 2 identifies the factors that seemed

to affect teachers‘ abilities to recognize the need to change and benefits that were mentioned

about each of the factors.

Table 2

Recognize the Need to Change

Factor Explanation Reported Benefits

Gain new perspective Teachers gained a new

perspective on their

teaching.

Using video analysis was easier than

reflecting in action.

Teachers were able to identify issues

of which they were not previously

aware.

Focus the analysis The analysis was focused

on specific aspects of

teaching.

Video analysis was more specific than

feedback teachers had typically

received on their teaching.

Teachers were able to focus their

reflections on two or three aspects of

teaching.

See with own eyes Teachers were able to see

both their strengths and

weaknesses with their own

eyes.

Teachers trusted video analysis

feedback because they were able to

see the need to change with their own

eyes.

Video analysis helped teachers

recognize issues that they were not

previously willing to accept.

Gain new perspective. Teachers reported that reflecting via video analysis was easier

than trying to reflect in action because they were able to see themselves from a new perspective.

Reflecting in action is often difficult for teachers because there are many things that compete for

their attention while they are teaching. Jen explained, ―When you‘re in the moment, you don‘t

realize what‘s happening, but when you can step back as an observer, you see more things and


have a desire to change.‖ Gaining a new perspective on the teaching situation helped teachers to

identify issues of which they were not previously aware. For example Jen said, ―After watching

the video, I noticed a lot about myself, but even more about the kids. I thought, ‗Wow, that‘s

why they weren‘t reading.‘ I noticed little cues or little things that you miss while you are

interacting with them.‖ Rachel who was working on praising her classroom helpers said, ―The

funny thing was that I felt like I was making a really big effort to say thank you, but I watched

the video, and the few times that I actually did praise them, I had to go back and rewind and go,

‗I swear I said something in here somewhere.‘ Although Rachel thought she had improved, the

video helped her realize that she needed to continue to work on the issue.

Erin, who focused her analysis on checking for understanding, told Kristy during their

discussion,

The sad part is that not once, not once, did I check for understanding. I assumed that they

understood, but I didn‘t ever say, ―Now does that make sense? Or is this clear? Do you

have any questions?‖ Anything like that.

As the teachers watched their videos, they often seemed surprised when what they viewed was

different from what they remembered.

Focus the analysis. Prior to this study, the teachers reported that they typically received

feedback on their teaching from classroom observers, reflecting from memory, student ratings, or

workshops. Teachers said that the feedback they received from these methods tended to be very

general. For example, Erin said that she had been observed every year for the last five years, but

the feedback she received was not specific enough to help her make improvements to her

teaching.


The person observing would say, ―Oh, it was so great. You did such a good job.‖ And

that‘s about it. But I can look through MediaNotes and say, ―Oh that was a poorly asked

question,‖ or ―Look at that right there. That was good, but I should have followed up

with this.‖ I think using MediaNotes is more beneficial because I‘m more honest with

myself than sometimes critiquers would be.

Participants also commented that the issues they remembered from their lessons tended to

be very general. Erin said, ―I think the one thing I love with the video analysis is that I can see

myself, and I don‘t have to remember.‖ The teachers often realized that several things in their

lessons did not go as planned. However, at the end of the day, when they actually had time to

stop and reflect, they couldn‘t remember everything they had recognized throughout the day.

Amy compared trying to reflect from memory to going grocery shopping without a list.

If you try and go to the grocery store, and you are like ―These are the things that I need.‖

And you go without a list and are just trying to remember, you may forget some things.

As opposed to if you write it all down and take it with you. With reflecting from

memory, I get done, and I‘m like, ―There was this thing that got one of the students upset,

but I don‘t remember why.‖ But when you watch it back you can say, ―Well at that

specific time right there, I did that and lost a kid. And this is what I did.‖ I don‘t have to

remember everything.

Several teachers mentioned that when they reviewed their teaching with a classroom

observer, it was difficult to remember everything the observer identified about their teaching.

Erin said,

If a teacher comes in on any given day to watch and then they say, ―Okay tell me what

you thought,‖ and, ―They say remember this part?‖ Sometimes I‘m trying my best to


recall it, but I can‘t. Whereas if you have the video, you can watch yourself again and

see ―Oh, I didn‘t realize I do that.‖ There is value in seeing rather than just hearing.

When teachers were unable to remember the events described by the classroom observer,

they felt that it was difficult to recognize the need to change. In contrast, replaying video clips

seemed to help teachers to better understand the comments made about their teaching. Betsy

said, ―Without video I might have just gone the whole semester not really focused on anything

specific and just kind of taught and tried to get better at teaching in general, but not really been

able to change anything specific.‖

See with own eyes. Teachers also said that they were more likely to change their

teaching when they saw the need to change with their own eyes because they trusted their own

eyes more than other feedback methods. Amy said, ―Sometimes you know you are supposed to

change something, but you don‘t really do it. You don‘t really recognize the need to change

until you see it on the video.‖ After doing video analysis, the teachers often recognized issues in

their teaching that they were not previously willing to accept. For example, Melissa had been

told several times by her supervisors that she did not teach to the whole class, but she never

addressed the issue. After watching her video she said, ―I noticed, especially through watching

the video, I always turn to the left side of the class and stand on the right side. I just talk to the

left side of the class.‖ Melissa said she finally addressed the issue because ―every time I got in

front of the class I thought: Who am I standing by? Where am I standing? Where am I in the

classroom?‖ As a result of the changes she made, she no longer has ―students that are sleeping

or not participating.‖

Erin mentioned that she would be also more likely to change her behavior in situations

outside the classroom if she could use video analysis. She said, ―Someone can tell you that you


are a bad driver, but you may not believe them. However, if you watch yourself on video, you

will recognize specific instances where you‘re driving needs to improve.‖

Amy explained that sometimes she recognizes when an activity is not going well, but

does not address the issue because she convinces herself that it isn‘t too bad or that it does not

matter because there is not much time left for the activity. She said, ―Teachers don‘t want to

critique themselves or say they could do better because it‘s easier to say that you are already

perfect.‖ Amy explained that watching her videos forced her to accept the need to change.

If you actually videotape it, and you go back and watch it, then you are forced to see

yourself actually making the mistake. As I watch myself, I think the whole time, ―I really

need to do something differently.‖

Brainstorm Ideas for Change

After teachers recognized the need to change their teaching, they brainstormed ideas to

improve future teaching situations. Teachers brainstormed individually as they analyzed their

teaching videos in MediaNotes and then collectively as they met with other teachers or a

supervisor. Teachers commented that the ideas suggested during the video analysis process were

better than the ideas generated when they tried to reflect on their teaching from memory because

video helped everyone understand the situation. As a result, the ideas individually brainstormed

and the group suggestions usually addressed their specific teaching needs. Table 3 lists the

factors that seemed to influence teachers‘ abilities to brainstorm ideas for change.

Identify specific changes. Some teachers commented that the suggestions they typically

received about their teaching were too general to help them improve. Teachers said that they

often went to other teachers for advice, but they were only able to describe the general problem

with which they were struggling. Amy explained, ―When you take a general problem to a


Table 3

Brainstorm Ideas for Change

Factor Explanation Benefits

Identify specific

changes

Teachers were able to

brainstorm specific ideas

Teachers were able to identify specific

ideas to address their individual

challenges.

Gain new perspective

Focused discussion

Group brainstorming

sessions helped teachers

gain a new perspective on

their teaching.

Discussion was focused

around specific clips which

the teachers marked.

Discussion groups were able to help

the teachers see their teaching from

another perspective and point out

things teachers missed when they

reflected individually.

Teachers felt that discussions were

better because the group was able to

offer more personalized suggestions.

Express empathy Discussion group was able

to express empathy.

Teachers felt like the group could

relate to their situation. Therefore,

they were more open to their

suggestions.

teacher, they can‘t see it, and you can‘t really explain it to them the way you saw it. Then when

you go back to try and fix the problem, it doesn‘t help as much. It doesn‘t help you think of

specific changes.‖ Teachers said the suggestions during the video analysis conferences were

more relevant and specific to their needs. ―The group could see exactly what was happening,

and they wouldn‘t just assume. They could see the way that I handled it, instead of me just

explaining how I handled it or what I thought was going on.‖ After watching a clip, teachers

would pause the video and ask, ―What do you think? What thoughts do you have for that?‖ The

teachers seemed to use the video to demonstrate specific situations that they had questions about.

For example, after showing a video clip, Erin said, ―I found that‘s the way I check for

understanding. Do you think that was a good way? Do you think I am making people feel

dumb?‖ At the conclusion of one of Jen‘s clips she said, ―There again after watching this, you


can tell that this is where I struggled.‖ Then she put her hands up in the air and said,

―Suggestions?‖ The other teachers were able to offer suggestions that dealt with the teachers‘

specific situations. As a result, teachers commented that they were more likely to implement the

suggestions. Melissa said, ―When there‘s not video to back up a suggestion, I think it‘s a little

harder to take those suggestions.‖

Gain new perspective. Teachers felt that sharing their teaching with others helped them

to gain a new perspective on their teaching because the group was able to ―see different things

than I saw.‖ Kathryn said, ―My best ideas come out of talking to other people.‖ In particular,

Rachel who was trying to improve story time in her classroom said, ―Discussion for me was the

most helpful. I don‘t think I would have thought to look at my book choice had we not had that

discussion.‖

Focused discussion. Video analysis seemed to allow teachers to focus their discussions

around specific issues where they might need change. Kathryn commented, ―If you had three

teachers in a classroom observing, you‘d probably all see something different because

everyone‘s eyes would be going to different places at different times. The video helped

everyone focus on the same situation and allowed us to reference the same things.‖ Video also

allowed the teachers to review specific clips several times. Teachers often said, ―Stop. Rewind.

Let me see that again.‖ Then they would discuss and clarify what was happening in the video.

Video seemed to help the teachers to anchor their conversations around specific clips.

Additionally, the discussion groups felt like video analysis helped the group to understand the

teachers‘ rationales for their instructional decisions. As teachers showed the video clips, the

other teachers read the written comments on each clip. Often the group would say, ―Stop. What

do you mean right there?‖ Then the teacher would explain what she had written and why she


had made the comment. Amy said, ―Being able to read the comments kind of made us be able to

get into each others‘ heads a little bit more, kind of think about how they were thinking about the

situation.‖ As a result of being able to understand the context of the teaching situation, the

discussion groups felt like they could offer better suggestions.

Express empathy. The video seemed to help the teachers relate to each other. After

watching the video clips, the discussion groups typically empathized with the teacher. They

would say things like, ―That‘s really difficult. If I recorded myself, I would probably do it more

than I realize.‖ Then the teachers would offer suggestions. ―I do that too, so what I want to try

to do is…‖ or ―I have that problem too, so one thing I think I‘ll try is…‖ It seemed important to

the teachers to know that the group had struggled with similar problems. After showing a video

clip, Kathryn asked, ―Do you ever do that?‖ It seemed like she wanted to know that the teachers

could relate to her issue. Teachers said they were more open to taking suggestions when they

felt like the group could relate to their specific situation.

Implement Ideas

The next stage in the change process was for the teachers to implement some of the ideas

that were brainstormed. Teachers commented that they typically implemented ideas that were

generated during the video analysis process because the ideas usually addressed their specific

needs and because they were allowed to select the ideas that they felt were best for their

particular situations. Teachers also commented that vivid images from the video and repetition

of watching themselves on video helped them to remember the ideas they wanted to implement

in future teaching situations. Table 4 lists the factors that appeared to influence the changes

teachers implemented in their future teaching.


Table 4

Implement Ideas in Future Teaching Situations

Factor Definition Reported Benefits

Ownership

Accountability

Vivid images

Repetition

Teachers reported that they were

more likely to implement ideas that

were generated because they felt

ownership over the reflection

process.

Teachers felt accountable to

implement ideas that were generated

in their discussion groups.

Videos created vivid images in

teachers' minds which helped them

remember the changes they wanted

to make.

Teachers were able to look at their

video and analysis multiple times.

Teachers felt like they had

ownership over ideas that were

generated because they chose

the focus of their reflection,

selected the video clips and

situations they wanted feedback

on.

Teachers often implemented

ideas that were generated in

their discussion groups because

they felt accountable to show

the group that they were trying

to improve their teaching.

Teachers remembered the

changes they wanted to make

while they were writing their

lesson plans and while teaching

future lessons.

Looking at the videos and

analyses multiple times, helped

teachers remember changes

they wanted to in future

teaching situations.

Ownership. Teachers reported that they were likely to implement the ideas that were

generated during the video analysis discussion groups because they felt ownership over the

reflection process since they had chosen the focus of their reflection and selected the video clips

and situations they wanted feedback on. Jen felt that classroom observations have not been very

effective for her. She said, ―I always feel like I have to make the goal they want me to make and

it‘s not very personal, and so I feel like I just don‘t try very hard to change when it‘s someone


else setting the goal.‖ In contrast, Jen said that video analysis, ―made it a lot more personal. I

actually analyzed myself doing that rather than someone else telling me what I did wrong.

Maybe that‘s the stubborn side of me, but I don‘t necessarily want to do something just to please

other people.‖

Melissa said,

[Video analysis] gives you the opportunity to change specific things that you want to

change and it‘s not something that a mentor is telling you to change or something that

a teacher is telling you to change, but it is really something that you are really looking

at in your own teaching and deciding you want to change.

Even though many of the ideas that the teachers implemented came from the suggestions during

the discussion groups, teachers seemed to feel ownership over the ideas they implemented.

Accountability. After brainstorming with the discussion group, teachers said they felt

accountable to show the group they had implemented some of the suggestions that were offered.

Rachel commented,

I would definitely be more likely to change because they know I‘m working on this, and I

know I‘m working on this, and I want to show that I really did make an effort. There is a

little bit of pressure to say, ―Look, I can take your suggestions.‖

Amy said, ―You wanted to hear [the group‘s] approval of ―That was really good. You took the

things that we said, and you followed through with them, and it worked, and we see it.‖

Additionally, Betsy commented, ―I want to see that it is better, and want to see that they can see

some improvement.‖

Vivid images. The video images appeared to help the teachers remember to implement

changes into their lesson plans. For example Melissa, who was trying to use more open-ended


questions in her lessons said, ―In preparing for class I‘ve been more aware of making open-ended

questions in my preparation and not just waiting until I get to class and thinking that I can just

come up with the questions.‖ Teachers also said that the video images popped into their minds

while they were teaching and reminded them to make changes. Amy said, ―All of the sudden

you are replaying the last video in your mind. I can see the kids start to do the same thing. Then

I remember, ‗Oh, I saw that in the last video and this is what the teachers suggested that I do and

this is what I suggested that I do. Then I try to fix it.‖ Kathryn said, ―I would be teaching, and I

would actually see myself on this little screen, and I see myself dragging the tags over and I

remember, ‗Oh, I did that,‘ or ‗Oh, I did that.‘ And it has helped me to remember what I wanted

to change.‖

Teachers mentioned that after watching their videos they were more conscious of what

was happening while they are teaching. Melissa said, ―It makes me more conscious in class

because when I saw it on the video, then during class I realize, ―Oh, I remember seeing this on

the video, and I don‘t want to do this.‖ Amy explained, ―I pay more attention to what is going

on while I‘m teaching. I would replay the video in my mind.‖ Teachers said, that ―even when

[they] are not recording, [they] notice the things that [they] tagged in [their] videotapes.‖

Repetition. Teachers liked recording their teaching because it created a ―permanent

product that could be reviewed as many times as you need.‖ The teachers said that reviewing the

video helped them remember the changes they wanted to implement. Amy reviewed one of her

videos 10 times. She said, ―It wasn‘t like I was trying to beat myself up even more every single

time, but it helps. It reminds me of something I‘m forgetting, and so the next time I do the

activity, I remember the video.‖


Evaluate Changes

Teachers typically evaluated the changes they implemented by reflecting from

memory or by using video analysis. Teachers usually recognized when their teaching improved

by reflecting from memory, but it seemed that video was used as proof to themselves and to

others that their teaching actually improved. Teachers also liked the formative nature of the

video analysis process because it focused on improvement rather than applying a final judgment.

Table 5 shows factors that the teachers felt were beneficial in helping teachers evaluate the

changes they made.

Table 5

Evaluate Changes

Factor Definition Reported Benefits

Proof Teachers felt that the video

evaluations served as proof

that their teaching improved.

Teachers liked seeing their

teaching improve in each of

the videos.

Teachers liked knowing that

the discussion group could

see their progress.

Formative Evaluation Teachers were able to evaluate

themselves prior to any final

judgments being made about

them.

Formative evaluation was

motivating for the teachers

because there was still time

to change their teaching

practices.

Formative evaluations were

motivating because the

teachers could see their

progress.

Teachers felt like the video

analysis process focused on

helping them improve rather

than applying a final

judgment to their teaching.


Proof. Although teachers often recognized that their teaching was improving, it

seemed as if they used video to prove to themselves that their teaching actually improved. After

Amy finished her second lesson she said, ―I was so happy. I was really happy that [a student]

was with me the whole time, but after the video was done, I was just more pleased that I was fun.

I was like, ‗Oh, I was fun!‘‖ It was as if Amy used the video to prove to herself that she really

was better. Betsy said, ―Video can boost my confidence because I think, ‗Oh good. I am

teaching all right. I am getting to be a better teacher than I thought I was.‘‖ Erin explained that

―video gave more concrete examples to whether I had done good or bad, so it was more than just

a feeling of ‗Did I do well? I think I did okay.‘ It was more concrete. ‖

It also appeared that teachers used video to prove to their discussion groups that their

teaching was getting better. For example Erin introduced one of her clips by saying, ―This is

what I tried to do…Let‘s see how I did.‖ Then she showed the clip to Kathryn. Although Erin

already knew she had done well, it was as if she wanted the video to prove it Kathryn. Kathryn

responded, ―I like that. That‘s cool. I like how you got them moving.‖ Discussion groups also

seemed more excited to see rather than listen to the teachers describe what they did well. As

Betsy and her supervisor watched the videos together, the supervisor would occasionally blurt

out, ―That was great!‖ The supervisor seemed to have a lot more excitement as she watched

Betsy do something great compared to when Betsy told her what went well in her lesson. It

seemed like it was clearer to the supervisor that Betsy really had done something well. Erin said

that her job was completely based on her student teaching evaluations. Then she said, ―I wish I

had had the video [earlier].‖ Erin described the video as ―proof.‖ She said, ―It‘s proof. It‘s

physical proof right there where you can actually see.‖


Formative evaluation. The formative nature of video analysis was motivating for

the teachers because there was still time to change their teaching practices, they could see their

progress, and the process was focused on helping them improve rather than assigning a final

judgment about their teaching. Kathryn mentioned that she thought student evaluations were

beneficial, but she had ―to wait for the end of a full term to get the feedback. She said, ―With the

video, you can do it one day and say, ‗Oh you know, that was not good.‘ Two weeks later you

can do it again and say, ‗Okay, I‘m improving. I‘m doing better.‘‖

Amy said, ―I was able to see a huge change from my very first videos to my last

video even though the very first time I tried video analysis, I was thinking to myself, ‗there‘s not

going to be a huge change.‘ At least I don‘t think because four weeks isn‘t enough time to make

a huge difference, but maybe I‘ll make a couple of changes or small changes or the kids will

progress a little bit. But because of the constant week by week changes that we are trying to

work on, little by little I was able to make huge progress.‖

Teachers were motivated when they could see themselves improving. Rachel

watched story time change from ―part of the day that everyone viewed as not very fun‖ to ―a

really fun time.‖ She said,

Before, when it was story time, the kids would go everywhere and everybody was

trying to re-gather them. But by the time we got to that fourth video, we‘d say, ―story

time,‖ and half the class was, boom, over there in their seats before the staff could tell

them to go. They were so involved in the stories and so excited about the stories,

where before they hated story time.

Teachers also appeared to be motivated when their discussion group complimented

them on their progress. The groups said things like, ―Wow! That was just amazing. That was


heads and tails above the last time. Look at that. Look at that! I think we should keep that

video on file. I think that‘s a good example.‖ The compliments motivated the teachers to

continue to work on their goals.

Discussion

Previous studies reported several benefits of using video for teacher reflection. However,

few studies addressed how video analysis influenced the process that led teachers to change their

teaching. Since the purpose of reflection is to improve teaching, it is essential to understand how

video might influence the process of teacher change. The results of this study may help

researchers and educators understand how video can be used to encourage teacher improvement.

Positive Effects of Video Analysis

Each teacher made changes to their practices after participating in the video analysis

process. Six over-arching themes emerged throughout the change process. Teachers reported

that video encouraged change because it helped them: (a) focus on key aspects of their teaching,

(b) gain a new perspective, (c) trust the feedback they received, (d) feel accountable to change

their practice, (e) remember to implement changes, and (f) see their progress.

Ability to focus on key aspects. Teachers felt that video analysis was beneficial because

it helped them narrow the focus of their reflection. This is not surprising since (Brinko, 1993)

claimed that narrowing the reflection focus can help teachers avoid a shallow analysis of their

teaching. The use of video analysis enabled a tightened focus by slowing down the fast pace of

the classroom and allowing teachers to focus on specific aspects of their teaching. Since

teachers chose two or three aspects of their teaching to focus on, it was easy to identify both

positive and negative examples in their videos. Teachers compared video analysis to a grocery

list which helps individuals stay focused on particular tasks in the store; video analysis helped


teachers remember to focus on specific aspects of their teaching rather than getting lost in the

complexity of the classroom environment.

Participating in a focused analysis also helped teachers identify specific changes they

wanted to make to their teaching. Teachers commented that the feedback they typically received

on their teaching was too general to make specific changes. Brawdy and Byra (1994) stated that

specific information is essential when providing feedback to teachers. Video allowed the

teachers to see specific examples of how they were doing with each aspect of their reflection

focus. Additionally, video allowed the discussion groups to see and understand the teachers‘

individual needs. As a result, the group was able to offer specific suggestions that addressed

their individual teaching needs. Carroll and Goldberg (1989) stated that narrowing the reflection

focus can help others make relevant observations and recommendations. Since the discussion

was focused on specific video clips, teachers were able to receive relevant suggestions that

addressed their individual needs. Receiving specific and relevant suggestions made it easier for

teachers to change their future teaching.

Interestingly, despite (or perhaps due to) the increased focus on specific aspects of

teaching, teachers in this study regularly reached a saturation point. After repeating the analysis

process three times with the same codes, teachers felt that they had ―improved enough‖ and were

ready to move to another aspect of their teaching. Therefore, many of the teachers felt like the

fourth round of video analysis was not very helpful, and some teachers actually decided to

change the focus for their fourth analysis. Furthermore, though teachers in this study focused on

two or three aspects of their teaching, some researchers suggest further narrowing reflection to a

single goal or skill (Brinko, 1993). Additional research is needed to determine the ideal number


of items teachers should focus on during their video analysis and across how many lessons

teachers should focus on those items.

Gain a new perspective. When individuals are entrenched in their environment it is

difficult for them to consider their situation from another perspective (Hamilton, Pinnegar,

Russell, Loughran & LaBoskey, 1998). As teachers watched their videos and discussed their

teaching with others, they were able to gain a new perspective on their teaching. This is a

common finding of many video analysis studies (Grainger, 2004; Miller & Carney, 2008; Rich &

Hannfin, 2009; Tripp, 2009). Video allows teachers to become an observer of their own

classroom (Seong & Broderick, 2003). Bryan and Recesso (2006) described this as the ability to

―step back from the practice‖ (p. 34) in order to review the event. Teachers in this study also

reported the ability to ―step back as observers‖ and notice issues in their teaching which they

could not recall from memory or which they had not attended to during their lesson. Loughran

(2006) noted that unless an issue is recognized as a problem, teachers are unlikely to change. As

teachers recognized problems in their teaching videos, they were more willing to accept the fact

that their teaching needed to change.

Increased trust in feedback. Throughout the study, teachers continually talked

about trusting video analysis feedback more than previous feedback methods they had used.

Brinko (1993) reported that feedback is most effective when teachers view the source as

credible. In this case, video served as a credible source which allowed teachers see with their

own eyes, and perhaps more importantly, believe in the need to change. Although teachers

trusted the video more, it is possible that combining video with other feedback methods would

increase their trust in the feedback received from those methods. Future research should


investigate whether combining video with other feedback methods increases teachers‘ trust in the

feedback.

Brinko (1993) indicated that instructors need to view feedback sources as

―knowledgeable enough to make an accurate judgment‖ (p. 577). Teachers trusted the ideas that

were suggested during their discussion groups because the group had a common frame of

reference and could see their specific challenges. Teachers felt like the groups‘ suggestions were

based on ―objective information.‖ Brinko (1993) indicated that ―feedback is more effective

when it contains irrefutable evidence‖ (p. 579). In the teachers‘ minds, video served as

―irrefutable evidence‖ on which the group based their suggestions. Since teachers trusted

feedback given by the group, they were more open to implementing the suggestions offered.

Teachers in this study selected their own discussion groups. The teachers selected

their supervisors, colleagues, and in some case both. It is possible that the trust teachers felt

toward their group‘s suggestions was partially due to who they selected to be in the group.

Future research might investigate whether teachers feel the same level of trust when they use

video to discuss their teaching with individuals they did not self select.

Motivated to improve. Participating in a video analysis process helped teachers feel

accountable to improve their teaching. After watching their own videos and sharing their videos

with others, it was difficult for teachers to deny that certain aspects of their teaching needed to

change. Teachers felt accountable to themselves and to their discussion group to show progress.

Each time teachers recorded a lesson, they wanted to see improvement. Ilgen, Fisher & Taylor

(1979) indicated that feedback associated with rewards or punishment can motivate individuals

to change. Seeing improvement in the videos and hearing the compliments from the discussion

group served as a reward to encourage teachers to change. Teachers were also motivated by fear


of seeing the same mistakes in consecutive videos or having the discussion group recognize that

their teaching did not improve. Similar to Rosaen et al. (in press), teachers in this study put more

effort into their analysis because they knew they would be sharing it with others. Teachers

wanted to be able to show their discussion group that they listened to their ideas, made changes,

and actually improved their teaching.

Improved memory of desired changes. While instructors were teaching, the images

seen in their videos often appeared in their minds. The images reminded them of the suggestions

they had written during their analysis, as well as the suggestions offered during their discussion

groups. As the images and suggestions entered their minds, they were able to make immediate

adjustments to their teaching. Teachers felt that video helped them ―think on their feet.‖ Schön

(1983) described this ability as ―Reflection in Action‖ or ―building new understandings to inform

our actions in the situation that is unfolding‖ (p. 83). It is important for teachers to be able to

reflect both after the lesson and in the moment (Schön, 1987). It is possible that video is not

only beneficial for helping teachers reflect after their lessons, but is also an effective means for

helping teachers develop the ability to reflect in action. Future research should investigate

whether teachers improve their ability to adjust their teaching in the moment when they use

video to reflect.

Ability to see progression. Teachers liked the formative nature of the video analysis

process better than evaluations they typically received because they had time to make

adjustments to their teaching, and they could see their progress across their videos. Rezler &

Anderson (1971) stated that feedback is more likely to lead to lasting change when repeated

exposures are used. Repeating the video analysis process several times allowed teachers to see

their progress. Although they often recognized that their teaching was improving, video served


as additional proof to themselves and to their discussion group that they were actually getting

better. Additionally, watching the video to evaluate their progress allowed teachers to identify

specific things that improved in their teaching, as well as specific things they still needed to work

on. Teachers in this study participated in the video analysis process four times. Future research

might look at the ideal amount of times the process should be repeated or the amount of time

between each analysis.

Conclusion

Teachers reported that video analysis was beneficial at each stage in the change process:

(a) recognizing the need to change, (b) brainstorming ideas for change, (c) implementing the

ideas, and (d) evaluating the changes that were implemented. Teachers felt that video analysis

was beneficial in helping them recognize the need to change because the video allowed them to

watch their lesson multiple times, gain a new perspective on their teaching, and focus their

reflection on specific aspects of their teaching. Teachers also reported that they were more likely

to change their practice after using video analysis because video allowed them to literally ―see‖

the need to change with their own eyes. After teachers recognized the need to change their

teaching, they brainstormed ideas to improve future teaching situations. The teachers

commented that the ideas brainstormed during the video analysis process were better than the

ideas generated when they tried to reflect on their teaching from memory because video helped

the discussion group better understand the situation. As a result, the suggestions teachers

received addressed their specific needs. Teachers also felt that vivid images in the video and

repetition of watching themselves on video helped them remember the suggestions they wanted

to implement. After making changes to their teaching, teachers used future videos as proof to

themselves and their discussion group that their teaching actually improved. Teachers liked the


formative nature of the video analysis process because the focus was on improvement rather than

a final judgment, they received feedback in time to make adjustments to their teaching, and they

could see their progress across their videos.

It should be noted that this study was conducted with teachers who volunteered to

participate in the video analysis process and were excited to explore a new technology to

improve their teaching. This may have contributed to the overly positive reaction teachers had

regarding the influence of video analysis on the teacher change process. To ensure that both

strengths and weaknesses of video analysis were represented accurately, researchers asked the

teachers questions such as ―How does video analysis compare to other methods you have used to

analyze your teaching? and What do you perceive to be the strengths of using video analysis to

reflect on your teaching?‖ Although researchers tried to encourage teachers to discuss both

strengths and weaknesses of video analysis, teachers always focused on the strengths. Teachers‘

responses included, ―Other [feedback] methods haven‘t been very successful for me. I like video

analysis a lot better. I just think it‘s a great way to go, and I think that there‘s a lot of benefit in

using video to analyze teaching.‖ Future research is needed to determine if teachers who are not

voluntarily trying to improve teaching have a similar experience with video analysis.


References

Brawdy, P. & Byra, M. (April, 1994). A comparison of two supervisory models in a preservice

teaching practicum. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational

Research Association. New Orleans.

Bryan, L. A., & Recesso, A. (2006). Promoting reflection with a web-based video analysis tool.

Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(1), 31-39.

Brinko, K. T. (1993). The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching: What is effective?,

The Journal of Higher Education, 64, 574-593.

Carroll, J. G. & Goldberg, S. R. (1989). Teaching consultants: A collegial approach to better

teaching, College Teaching, 37, 143-46.

Dye, B. (2006). Reliability of Self-Evaluation of Pre-Service Teaching Performance Using

Video-Annotated Tools. Unpublished Thesis, Brigham Young University.

Grainger, S. (2004). Practitioners as professionals: revealing the artistry of expert educators.

Paper presented at the 7th Australian VET Research Association Conference, Canberra.

Griswold, S. L. (2004). Videotaped performances: Guiding teacher professional development

within a competency-based framework. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(10).

(UMI No. 3150452)

Halter, C. P. (2006). The reflective lens: The effects of video analysis on preservice

Teacher development. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(03). (UMI No. 3211280)

Hamilton, M. L., Pinnegar, S., Russell, T., Loughran, J. & LaBoskey, V. (1998)

Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Self study in teacher education. London: Farmer

Press.

Hougham, P. (1992). Improving student teachers‘ strategies for asking a range of both high and


low level questions through video evaluation. Ed. D. Practicum, Nova University.

Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D. & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on

behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349-371.

Korthagen & Wubbels (2001). Evaluative research on the realistic approach and on the

promotion of relflection. In F. A. J. Korthagen (Ed.), Linking practice and theory: The

pedagogy of realistic teacher education (pp. 88-107). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Inc.

Loughran, J. (2006). A response to ‗Reflecting on the self,‘ Reflective Practice, 7(1), 43-53.

Meade, P. & Meriman, M. (1992). Stimulated recall: An effective methodology for examining

successful teaching in science. Australian Educational Researchers, 19(3), 1-18.

Miller, M. & Carney, J. (2008) Using Video Annotation Software to Enhance the Mentoring and

Professional Development of Teacher Candidates, Washington State Kappan: A journal

for research, leadership, and practice, 2(2) 16-17, 32.

Miyata, H. (2002). A study of developing reflective practices for preservice teachers through a

web-based electronic teaching portfolio and video-on demand assessment program.

Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education, Washington,

DC, 1039-1043.

Pailliotet, A. W. (1995). I never saw that before: A deeper view of video analysis in teacher

education. Teacher Educator, 31(2), 138-156.

Penny, A. R. & Coe, R. (2004). Effectiveness of consultation on student ratings feedback: A

meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(2) 215-253.

Powell, E. (2005). Conceptualising and facilitating active learning: Teachers‘ video- stimulated

reflective dialogues. Reflective Practice, 6(3), 401-418.


Rezler, A. G. & Anderson, A. S. (1971). Focused and unfocused feedback and self-perception.

Journal of Educational Research, 65(2), 61-64.

Rich, P., Recesso, A., Allexsaht-Snider, M., & Hannafin, M. J. (2007). The use of video-based

evidence to analyze, act on, and adapt preservice teacher practice. In American

educational research association. Chicago, IL: American Educadtional Research

Assocation.

Rich, P. J., & Hannafin, M. J. (2008). Capturing and assessing evidence of student teacher

inquiry: A case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(6), 1426-1440.

Rich, P., & Hannafin, M. J. (2009). Scaffolded video self-analysis: Discrepancies between

preservice teachers' perceived and actual instructional decisions. Journal of Computing in

Higher Education, 21(2), 128-145.

Rosaen, C., Lunderberg, M., Cooper, M., Fritzen, A., & Terpstra, M. (in press). Interns‘ use of

video cases to problematize their practice: Crash, burn, and (maybe) learn. Journal of

Technology and Teacher Education; in press

Schmidt, C. P., & McCutcheon, J. W. (1994). Verbal versus nonverbal cues in evaluations of

teaching. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27(2), 118-225.


Temple Smith.

Schön D (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Seong, B. H. & Broderick, J. T (2003). Instant video revisiting for reflection: Extending the

learning of children and teachers, Journal on the Development, Care, and Education of

Young Children, 5(1), 1-15.


Sherin, M. G., & van Es, E. A. (2005). Using video to support teachers‘ ability to notice

classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 475-491.

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant Observation. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Struyk, L. R. & McCoy, L. H. (1993). Pre-service teachers‘ use of videotape for self-evaluation.

Clearning House, 67(1), 31-34.

Taggart, G. & Wilson, A. (1998). Promoting reflective thinking in teachers: 44 action strategies.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

Tripp, T. R. (2009). Understanding the use of video analysis tools to facilitate reflection

among pre-service teachers. Thesis, unpublished Master's thesis, Brigham Young

University.

van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive

pedagogy. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.


Final Conclusion

Article 1

The first article in this dissertation reviewed the dimensions of the video analysis process

that varied across past studies. The paper is organized around six questions educators may want

to consider when establishing a video reflection process. The intent of this paper is to help

educators make more informed decisions as they begin conducting their own video analysis

studies. The conclusions regarding each of the video analysis dimensions are briefly discussed

below.

Reflection tasks. There are a variety of reflection tasks which teachers can engage in

during the video analysis process. Past studies asked teachers to complete codes and checklists,

participate in interviews or conferences, write reflections, and edit their videos. The majority of

studies reported that these tasks were valuable for facilitating reflection. However, teachers

preferred conferences over the other reflection tasks. Teachers felt like video discussions helped

them see their teaching from a new perspective. Video also provided a common frame of

reference on which the discussions were based. As a result, teachers felt like the suggestions and

recommendations made during the video conferences were the most important factor in the

changes they made to their teaching. Although the reflection tasks appeared to be beneficial for

helping teachers reflect on their teaching, there are several aspects of these tasks that need further

investigation: (a) the ideal number of items to include on coding sheets and checklists, (b) how

the logistics of video conferences should be carried out, (c) the most effective way to use video

editing, and (d) whether combining video discussions with the other tasks increases the perceived

value of those tasks.


Reflection facilitation. Past studies used reflective questions, rubrics, checklists, and

category codes as frameworks for the reflection process. Researchers reported that providing a

framework enhanced the quality of teachers‘ reflections. However, teachers reported that they

wanted to choose their own reflection focus. Therefore, researchers might consider allowing

teachers to select the focus of their reflection and then helping teachers to narrow the focus to a

structured framework.

Individual/collaborative reflection. Teachers overwhelming reported that they preferred

discussing their reflections with others to individually reflecting on their videos. This was

especially prominent in preservice teachers who trusted others‘ opinions more than their own. A

couple of studies indicated that asking teachers to discuss their video individually and then

collectively improved the collective discussions because teachers were more prepared.

Additional research is needed to investigate the benefits of using both individual and

collaborative reflection as part of the video analysis process. Future research might also

investigate the number of conferences necessary for optimal growth and how frequently the

conferences should be held.

Length of videos and number of reflections. Although the length of video teachers

reflected on and the number of times teachers reflected on their videos varied across the studies,

none of the studies investigated how these characteristics impacted teachers‘ reflections.

Therefore, future research is needed to determine the optimal length of video teachers should use

for reflection, as well as the number of times teachers should reflect on their videos.

Measuring reflection. Examining the benefits of video on teachers‘ reflections can help

researchers determine whether the benefits teachers receive from participating in video analysis

are worth the investment of time and money required to conduct the process. There are various


ways that past studies measured the effect of video on teacher reflection. Studies examined

teachers‘ reflection comments, changes in teaching practices, self-assessment of reflection

ability, perceptions of effectiveness, pre- and post-test scores, and coding accuracy. Researchers

who are interested in using video for reflection will need to determine which combination of

these methods will help them effectively answer their specific questions about the video analysis

process.

By looking across several studies, we synthesized several dimensions of the video

analysis process. Presented as practical considerations, these enable educators to understand how

their approach to video analysis might yield varying results. Careful consideration of each of

these dimensions does not guarantee that a successful process will be developed. However, these

can serve as a framework for those who are interested in using video to facilitate teacher

reflection.

Article 2

The second article examined the how video analysis influenced the process that led

teachers to change their teaching. Teachers reported that video analysis was beneficial at each

stage in the change process: (a) recognizing the need to change, (b) brainstorming ideas for

change, (c) implementing the ideas, and (d) evaluating the changes that were implemented.

Teachers felt that video analysis was beneficial in helping them recognize the need to change

because the video allowed them to watch their lesson multiple times, gain a new perspective on

their teaching, and focus their reflection on specific aspects of their teaching. Teachers also

reported that they were more likely to change their practice after using video analysis because

video allowed them to literally ―see‖ that their teaching needed to change. After teachers

recognized the need to change their teaching, they brainstormed ideas to improve future teaching


situations. The teachers commented that the ideas brainstormed during the video analysis

process were better than the ideas generated when they tried to reflect on their teaching from

memory because video helped the discussion group better understand the situation. As a result,

the suggestions teachers received addressed their specific needs. Teachers also felt that vivid

images in the video and repetition of watching themselves on video helped them remember the

suggestions they wanted to implement. After making changes to their teaching, teachers used

future videos as proof to themselves and their discussion group that their teaching actually

improved. Teachers liked the formative nature of the video analysis process because the focus

was on improvement rather than a final judgment, they received feedback in time to make

adjustments to their teaching, and they could see their progress across their videos. One of the

limitations of this article was that all the teachers were volunteers who were excited to use a

video analysis tool to improve their teaching. Future research is needed to determine whether the

findings apply to teachers who are not voluntarily trying to improve their teaching.

Overall, both articles in this dissertation found that video analysis was beneficial for

teachers. Teachers reported that video analysis allowed them to gain a new perspective on their

teaching, watch their lesson multiple times, focus their reflection on specific aspects of their

teaching, see the need to change with their own eyes, and evaluate their progress across

consecutive videos. Additionally, video allowed discussion groups to understand the teachers‘

individual situations and therefore offer suggestions that addressed their specific needs.

Although both studies reported that video analysis can help teachers improve their

teaching, there are many aspects of the video analysis process that need investigation. For

example, there are many logistical questions that have not been answered, such as the number of

opportunities teachers should be given to reflect, how frequent the reflection should be, the


optimal length of the videos that should be used for refle ction, or how discussion groups should

be organized. Additionally, further investigation is needed to determine whether teachers who

do not voluntarily choose to use video analysis still improve their teaching after participating in

the video analysis process.


Appendix: Methods

Due to the article format of this dissertation, there was limited to space to describe the

research methods that were used in this study. Listed below are the methods that were approved

in my prospectus defense. These methods were used with the following exceptions: (a) I did not

need to digitize the teachers‘ videos because we allowed teachers to borrow cameras which

recorded in a format that was compatible with Media Notes, (b) participants were teachers of

autistic students, English language learners, and seminary students,(c) due to limited space,

vignettes were replaced with participant‘s direct quotes and brief experiences, and (d)

participants were given the opportunity to review their quotes, but not the final list of themes or

the entire findings section.

Method Rationale

I will use a multiple case-study approach for this project. Stake (1995) described case

studies as ―the study of the particularity and complexity of a single case, coming to understand

its activity within important circumstances‖ (p. xi). A multiple case study approach is

appropriate for this research project because it will allow me to focus on understanding the depth

of a few cases where instructors use video analysis tools to improve their teaching. Four cases of

teachers engaging in video reflection practices will be used in this study. I will focus my data

collection and analysis on understanding how the use of video tools influence the changes

teachers make. This will enable me to focus on providing a rich description. Van Manen (1990)

indicated that rich descriptions of lived experiences increase our understanding of the meaning of

pedagogy. He stated, ―When someone has related valuable experience to me then I have indeed

gained something even though the ‗thing‘ gained is not a quantifiable entity‖ (p. 53).


Procedures

This study will take place over four months. Figure 3 shows the steps that will be used to

complete the study.

Figure 3. Steps that will be used during the study.

Set up. The first month of the study will be spent setting up the process. I will meet

individually with each of the teachers to explain the procedures they will use to analyze their

teaching. Then the teachers will identify the criteria they believe constitutes good teaching, and I

will ask them to compare their teaching to the criteria they identified. Then we will discuss

which criteria the teachers would like to focus on during their video analyses and how they will

know if their teaching is improving. Allowing teachers to choose their own criteria for

analyzing their teaching gives them ownership over the reflection process and allows them to

focus on the areas of their teaching that they have the greatest desire to improve.

During the initial meeting, I will download the video analysis tool, Media Notes, to

teachers‘ computers and show them how to use it. I chose to use Media Notes over other video


analysis tools because Media Notes‘ coding features and search options make it easier for

teachers to analyze their teaching. Additionally, it is not a web-based application, which

eliminates the concern about posting videos of students on the web. Media Notes is also free for

BYU students and faculty who are conducting research with teachers.

Next, the participants will choose peer(s) or supervisor(s) who will meet with them to

discuss their video analyses. It is important for teachers to be able to choose their discussion

groups because they will be able to select people they feel comfortable sharing their teaching

with and whose opinions about teaching they respect. At the end of the meeting, the participants

will set a flexible schedule for recording their teaching and discussing their analyses.

Record teaching. During the following months, the teachers will video four 30 to 45

minute lessons. After each recording, I will pick up the video from the teachers and digitize it. I

will upload the digitized videos to a secure server during the same week they are recorded. This

will allow participants to analyze their lessons while the lesson is still fresh in their minds. I

have chosen to digitize the videos myself to avoid technical difficulties that would take extra

time for the teachers to address.

Analyze teaching. After the teachers receive their digitized video, they will upload it

into the Media Notes program. As the teachers analyze their videos, they will code it according

the criteria they selected for improving their teaching. When teachers focus their reflections on

specific criteria they tend to be more reflective and realistic about their teaching skills (Jensen,

1994). The teachers will mark and comment on video clips that provide evidence of when they

met or did not meet the criteria. I will also provide the teachers with a reflection guide to

encourage them to think about different levels of reflection. Then the teachers will choose

specific clips that they want to share with their discussion group.


Discussion. The teachers will consult with their peers or supervisor to discuss their

analysis. Penny and Coe (2004) reported that discussing teaching with others is one of the most

important features of a teacher feedback system. During the consultation, the teachers will give

a brief explanation of the background of their lesson and introduce the video clips they will be

showing. The teachers will present a question about their teaching and then show a few of their

video clips. The peers or supervisor will discuss the clips with the teacher and offer suggestions

for future teaching situations. After teachers receive feedback from their peers or supervisor,

they will decide what action they want to take to improve their teaching, and they will implement

the action in future lesson. Then the teachers will video another lesson and repeat the process

three more times.

Context and Participants

There will be five main participants in this study: an elementary public school teacher,

two college instructors, and two religious education teachers. All of the participants asked if

they could be part of the study because they were interested in using video to improve their

teaching. The teachers come from different instructional settings, which may allow me to

identify important and common patterns across a variety teaching situations. Additionally, the

teachers or supervisors involved in the discussion groups will also be participants in the study.

These participants will be identified by the teachers who are using video analysis.

Elementary public school teacher. The public school teacher participating in this study

has taught fourth grade for eight years. She currently teaches at an elementary school in a rural

town in Utah. After hearing about the video analysis tool, Media Notes, she expressed interest in

using it to determine how she can improve her teaching.


College instructors. This study will include two college instructors from a religious,

business college. Both teachers volunteered to use video to analyze their teaching when hearing

about MediaNotes from a colleague. One of the instructors mentioned that he is excited about

participating in this study because he is interested in using video analysis with the teachers he

supervises. He is one of only 17 full-time instructors at his institution, which employs over 130

instructors. The other instructor is a part-time instructor that teaches college mathematics at this

and another local community college.

Religious education teachers. There will be two religious education teachers

participating in the study. They are employed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day

Saints. The instructors teach religious education classes to high school students. Currently, they

teach four sections of New Testament each day. One of the instructors has been teaching for 8.5

years, and the other instructor has been teaching 5 years. After I explained the video analysis

tool, Media Notes, to the teachers, they asked if they could use it to analyze their teaching.

When I asked them why they were interested in using it, one of the teachers said:

It is always helpful when you are videotaped and see yourself on camera. You learn a lot

about yourself and your teaching. The Media Notes software sounds like an amazing tool

to enhance the evaluation experience and will help one be more effective in analyzing

their teaching and skills. One will also have a chance to have more people view and

evaluate your teaching and be able to comment on it. I think it will be a great chance to

improve my teaching. A teacher should always be improving and never be content with

where they are at. One can always improve.


Discussion group participants. Each of the teachers will select their own discussion

groups. Members of this group will watch the video clips that the teacher chooses to share and

provide feedback and suggestions to help the teacher improve.

Data Collection Procedures

In order to create a rich description, I will collect a variety of information. The following

section describes the type of data and manner of data collection strategies.

Observations. I will observe the teachers‘ discussions of their video analyses with their

peers or mentors. During the observations, I will seek to understand how the teachers are using

video analysis tools to identify changes they want to make to their teaching practices. The

conversations during the observations will be recorded and transcribed. Written notes will also

be used to answer the observation questions. The participants will be asked follow up questions

after the observations in order to clarify some of the researcher‘s observations.

Interviews. I will interview the instructors after they have had an opportunity to

implement the changes they identified through video analysis reflection. The purpose of the

interview questions will be to understand how the use of the video analysis tool influenced the

changes the teachers decided to made to their teaching, how the instructors implemented the

changes to their teaching, and how they evaluated the changes they made. The interview

questions will be flexible to allow the participants to discuss additional points of interest. I will

also interview the discussion group participants to try and understand if and how they feel the

teacher has changed.

Artifacts. I will review the video analysis clips and written comments in order to

understand how the teachers used the video analysis tools to identify changes they wanted to

make to their teaching. I will also review the video clips to look at how the instructors


implemented the changes they decided to make to their teaching. If other artifacts are referred to

by the participants during interviews or discussion groups, I will collect them to provide further

proof that the teachers are making changes to their teaching.

Data Analysis Procedures

I will use domain and taxonomic analysis as recommended by Spradley (1980) for

analyzing case studies. This will allow me to identify important and common themes in the data.

For each of the research questions, I will review the data to look for common themes that appear.

Then I will use NVIVO to code the data according to the domains that are indentified. Then I

will re-code the data to identify sub-themes for each of the domains. I will look through the data

to identify issues that are consistently raised by the participants or appear to be very important to

a participant. These themes will become the sub domains. When a final list of domains and sub

domains is created, I will re-code the data to make sure I am satisfied with the coding.

Data Reporting

For each research question, vignettes will be presented, which describe how the

instructors used video analysis tools to determine the changes they want make to their teaching,

what changes the instructors implemented in future teaching situations, and how the instructors

evaluated the changes they make to their teaching. The purpose of the vignettes will be to

present the reader with rich descriptions about how instructors change(d) their teaching practices

after using video analysis tools to reflect. Following the vignettes, I will present a table of

common themes and sub themes that relate to each research question. Then, evidence to support

each of the themes will be presented. I will use direct quotes from the participants to describe

each of the identified themes. I will use member checking to improve the accuracy and

credibility of the report. Participants will be given the opportunity to review the findings to


confirm whether the findings reflect their experience using video analysis to improve their

teaching.

Standards Followed

To ensure the trustworthiness of the study, I will use the following standards

recommended by Lincoln and Guba (1985):

Credibility. I will increase the credibility of the study by doing the following tasks:

1. Persistent observation: I will use persistent observations by spending the

semester observing the participants discuss their video analyses and

interviewing the participants about their experiences.

2. Triangulation: I will use multiple interviews with the teachers, observation

notes, and literature on video analysis tools for information sources. The

conclusions of this study will be based on common themes found in the data

collected.

3. Negative case analysis: During data collection and analysis, I will look for

cases, or examples that are exceptions to the identified themes. When negative

cases are identified, I will continue to look for similar exceptions.

4. Progressive subjectivity checks: Throughout the study, I will periodically

record my perspective of what I am learning and feeling in my field notes.

5. Member Checks: The participants will be asked to confirm or disconfirm the

sub domains that are indentified and their quotes that are used in the findings

Dependability. I will increase the dependability of the study by including detailed

descriptions about the sampling, data collection, and analysis procedures that are used to conduct


the study. The descriptions will be included in the final report. This will allow readers to judge

the trustworthiness of the study.

Confirmability. I will increase the confirmability of the study by tying the findings to

literature and to others who had similar experiences. I will support the interpretations with direct

quotes from the participants. I will also keep an audit trail that includes the dates of each of the

observations, interviews, coding, and personal notes.

Transferability. I will include thick descriptions about the experience of the participants

by using their own words and stories. I will also provide a detailed description of the context of

the case. Although thick description will not ensure transferability of the findings because the

readers ultimately make the decision about whether the findings transfer to their own situations,

Williams (2006) stated that thick description ―is the most powerful technique for facilitating

transferability.‖

Ethical treatment. Participants will be treated ethically and will be allowed to withdraw

from the study at anytime. Pseudonyms will be used to present each participant‘s case. The

researcher will respect the participants‘ schedule and try to refrain from intruding on their normal

schedules.

Assumptions

Van Manen (1990) suggests that researchers reveal their assumptions about the

phenomenon they are studying. The paragraphs on the following pages describe my assumptions

about the study and teacher reflection.

Transferability. Although the results will not be generalizable to all situations where

instructors use video analysis tools to make changes to their teaching practices, I assume the

results will be transferable to many situations where instructors use video to improve their


teaching, because I will provide rich descriptions of a various cases where instructors used video

analysis to reflect on their teaching. Transferability will depend on my ability to make

connections between the researcher‘s descriptions in this study and their own experiences.

Technical difficulties. I assume that the participants will encounter some technical

difficulties either setting up the video analysis tool, using the tool, or with the video equipment

that may influence their feelings about Media Notes.

Ability to attend to multiple things. I assume that many teachers have a difficult time

attending to multiple things in their lessons and that it is difficult for teachers to reflect on events

that they did not attend to. Because video provides the opportunity to revisit certain aspects of a

lesson, it may help teachers to notice things that they had not attended to before.

Ability to remember the teaching event. I assume that teachers‘ abilities to reflect on

their lessons are influenced by their ability to remember the lesson. Video may improve

teachers‘ abilities to reflect by helping them remember specific events in the lesson.

Opportunity to discuss reflections. I assume that teachers will gain more insights about

teaching when they discuss their reflections with others than when they reflect on their own. In

Penny and Coe‘s (2004) meta-analysis of teacher feedback strategies, they reported that

discussing teaching with peers is an essential feedback strategy. Therefore, teachers should be

given the opportunity to discuss their reflections with their peers or mentors.


References for Combined Sections

Jensen, R. A., (1994, February). Fear of the known: Using audio-visual technology as a tool for

reflection in teacher education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the

Association of Teacher Education, Atlanta, GA.

Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Penny, A. R. & Coe, R. (2004). Effectiveness of consultation on student ratings feedback:

A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(2) 215-253.


Temple Smith.

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant Observation. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action

sensitive pedagogy. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Williams, D. D. (2006). Educators as inquirers: Using qualitative inquiry. Web-based book

retrieved Nov. 6, 2006 from http://webpub.byu.net/ddw/qualitativebook/.

http://webpub.byu.net/ddw/qualitativebook/

the influence of video analysis on teaching

Documents